Friday, March 29, 2024
HomeLawMedical professional cannot assure that patient will overcome medical crisis: Supreme Court

Medical professional cannot assure that patient will overcome medical crisis: Supreme Court

The bench led by Justice Rastogi noted that Naveen’s family agreed to the fact that the doctors who treated him, were experts in the field.

“Any individual approaching such a skilled person would have a reasonable expectation under the duty of care and caution but there could be no assurance of the result. No doctor would assure a full recovery in every case. At the relevant time, only assurance given by implication is that he possessed the requisite skills in the branch of the profession and while undertaking the performance of his task, he would exercise his skills to the best of his ability and with reasonable competence,” the bench said, while referring to the top court’s decision in Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab and Another.

The judges further said that the liability would arise only if (a) either a person (doctor) did not possess the requisite skills which he professed to have possessed; or (b) he did not exercise with reasonable competence in given case the skill which he did possess.

The bench then referred to various case laws dealing with medical negligence and said,

“It clearly emerges from the exposition of law that a medical practitioner is not to be held liable simply because things went wrong from mischance or misadventure or through an error of judgment in choosing one reasonable course of treatment in preference to another. In the practice of medicine, there could be varying approaches of treatment. There could be a genuine difference of opinion. However, while adopting a course of treatment, the duty cast upon the medical practitioner is that he must ensure that the medical protocol being followed by him is to the best of his skill and with competence at his command. At the given time, medical practitioner would be liable only where his conduct fell below that of the standards of a reasonably competent practitioner in his field.”

The judges, further noted that the team that operated Naveen had already conducted 900 to 1000 successful renal transplant surgeries.

“Even as per the case sheet of the patient, doctors have treated him to the best of their medical knowledge and administered the best medical care which was possible. Although the complaint of the patient which remained persistent could not be ruled out despite medically approved drugs being administered to him and if he could not be finally saved, that in itself could not be considered to be a case of post operative medical negligence,” the Court held.

Source: Barandbench

RELATED ARTICLES
- Advertisment -

Most Popular

Recent Comments