A recent survey conducted by forensic doctors at KMC, Mangaluru, in collaboration with the Department of Law at SDM College, has indicated that tele-evidence can serve as a viable alternative to doctors physically appearing in court.
Dr. B Suresh Kumar Shetty, a Professor and Associate Dean in the Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology at KMC, stressed that doctors often have to testify in court as part of their professional responsibilities. This results in their absence from hospitals, the expense of travel, and time lost, ultimately affecting the doctor-patient ratio, especially in primary health centers and community health centers in India.
The survey revealed that over half of the participating doctors incurred personal expenses exceeding Rs 1,000 when appearing in court, leading to their dissatisfaction. Disadvantages of in-person court appearances included time away from the hospital, proceedings being canceled or postponed, key participants being absent, and no reimbursement for expenses.
The survey also referenced a study on “Tele-evidence” as an alternative to physical appearances, which indicated reductions in vehicle mileage, fuel costs, and time spent on court duties.
From the perspective of law students, the survey showed that they believed tele-evidence could replace doctors’ physical appearances, benefiting both doctors and patient care. However, the survey also highlighted that law students had limited exposure to such technological advances, potentially affecting the quality of a doctor’s testimony in court.
The survey concluded that the decision to implement tele-evidence facilities for doctors is within the purview of the Indian courts. Such facilities could ease the burden on India’s healthcare system and offer environmental benefits by reducing fuel consumption and emissions.
Survey Highlights Tele-Evidence as an Alternative for Doctors in Legal Proceedings Though Uncertain About Testimony Quality
