Court Emphasizes Need for Objective Probe into Alleged Medical Negligence During Four-Hour Delay in Surgery at Chinmaya Mission Hospital
The Karnataka High Court today rejected the petition filed by Chinmaya Mission Hospital and its doctor seeking to quash a First Information Report (FIR) alleging medical negligence that led to the amputation of a six-month-old infant's little finger during treatment. The Court underscored the necessity for a thorough and objective investigation, supported by expert medical opinion, to determine whether the hospital staff and attending doctor followed the required medical protocols.
The case arose when a six-month-old baby admitted to the hospital for treatment was administered an intravenous drip. According to the complaint, while a nurse was removing the drip, the infant's little finger was accidentally chopped off. The nurse reportedly took the baby to the emergency ward and informed the doctor on duty. However, surgery to address the injury was delayed for about four hours.
The petitioners contended that the doctor was not present during the incident and, being a paediatrician, was not qualified to perform such surgery. They also pointed out that the hospital management had suspended the nurse involved and was conducting an internal inquiry. The petitioners claimed that the registration of the FIR amounted to an abuse of the legal process.
On the other hand, the respondents argued that although the doctor was not present at the time of the mishap, the doctor failed to take prompt action to secure a surgeon or refer the infant for immediate surgery, which could amount to medical negligence. The delay in treatment and the lack of escalation to higher medical authorities warranted investigation.
Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde, presiding over the matter, observed that while the immediate cause of the injury was the nurse's alleged negligence, the circumstances during the subsequent four-hour period in the emergency ward required careful scrutiny. The Court highlighted that if the doctor and hospital staff had followed the prescribed medical protocols and taken necessary precautions, the incident might not amount to negligence. Conversely, failure to do so could indicate culpability.
The Court directed the police to conduct an impartial investigation with assistance from medical experts to assess whether the delay and treatment constituted negligence under the law. The police were instructed to file an appropriate report based on this expert evaluation.
Importantly, the Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits or demerits of the complaint and that the quashing of the FIR at this stage was premature.
This judgment reiterates the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that allegations of medical negligence are investigated thoroughly, balancing the rights of patients with the responsibilities of healthcare providers.
Bottom Line:
Petition for quashing FIR alleging medical negligence rejected at investigation stage where infant's little finger was allegedly chopped off while removing drip and surgery was allegedly delayed for four hours; Court held that what transpired during said period required objective investigation with assistance of medical expert to determine whether prescribed medical protocol was followed.
Statutory provision(s):
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 125(b)
Doctor, Chinmaya Mission Hospital v. State of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2997210
