The Supreme Court, during a case concerning medical negligence, stressed the need for a higher standard of proof to establish a doctor’s liability for negligence. This is to ensure that healthcare professionals can focus on making treatment decisions based on their expertise without undue concerns about potential legal consequences in high-risk medical situations. Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Manoj Misra stated that to hold a doctor accountable for medical negligence, the complainant must be able to demonstrate a breach of duty and prove that the resulting injury was a direct consequence of that breach.
The case revolved around an incident of alleged medical negligence at Suretech Hospital in Nagpur, where Mrs. Sunita Parvate suffered permanent damage to her respiratory tract and lost her voice. The complaint centered on the unnecessary and forcefully conducted Nasotracheal Intubation (‘NI’) procedure. The Court noted that the medical team at the hospital had thoroughly considered the treatment approach before choosing the ‘NI’ procedure, and there was no negligence in their decision.
The Court emphasized that within the realm of medical practice, there can be different opinions and varied approaches to treatment. Just because a doctor’s chosen course of treatment did not yield the desired outcome should not automatically imply negligence. The Court underlined the importance that the chosen treatment should not be considered outdated or improper, and doctors should select it after careful consideration.
The Court asserted that the burden of proving negligence lies with the complainant. In this case, Mrs. Sunita failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish medical negligence by the doctors. There was no indication that the ‘NI’ procedure was an unsound medical practice. The Court recognized the intricate and ever-evolving nature of medical science and the complexities doctors face when making decisions in such dynamic situations.
In conclusion, the Court determined that this was a case reflecting human fallibility, where the doctors acted responsibly and prudently based on their expertise and the evolving circumstances. Although the desired outcomes were not achieved, the actions of the medical team at Suretech Hospital could not be categorized as medical negligence. The Court concluded that the medical team at Suretech Hospital acted reasonably and responsibly in their treatment of Mrs. Sunita.