NIRMALA DEVI Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Nos. 1 and 2 are parents of petitioner no.3, Master Deependra, who was born on 14.06.2001. Master Deependra is stated to be suffering from mental disorder and requires constant care. It is stated that he is abnormal, aggressive and completely unpredictable. The petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 are distraught by the condition of their son and its effect on their lives. The learned counsel for the petitioners has explained in length the miserable condition of petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 that has resulted from bringing up a child with mental disorder. The petitioners claim that they have a right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and have prayed that the respondents make suitable arrangements for the livelihood, education and development of their son. The petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are also claiming resources from the respondents to bring up their son so that he may live in the society with dignity. In addition, petitioner nos.1 and 2 have claimed compensation of Rs. 50 lacs for the indignation and humiliation faced by them on account of failed sterilisation procedure performed on petitioner No.1.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts are that petitioner no.2 was posted at Agra Cantt. during the year 2000, as he was a serving member of Indian Armed Forces. At the material time, the Government of India had floated a programme for family planning and petitioner nos.1 and 2 were persuaded to participate in that initiative. Petitioner no.1 was admitted to the Military Hospital, Agra Cantt. on 21.01.2000 and underwent a procedure for Tubectomic operation, which should have resulted in her sterilization. The sterilization certificate was also issued to petitioner no.1 on 03.02.2000. Apparently, the procedure was not successful and the petitioner conceived petitioner no.3, who was born on 14.06.2001. The learned counsel for the petitioners has alleged that the respondents ought to be made accountable for the negligence, as well as, the trauma that was faced by the petitioners, thereafter.

(3.) THE Supreme Court in the case of Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab: : (2005) 6 SCC 1 approved the tests as laid down in the case of Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee:, (1957) 2 AII ER 118 (QBD) with respect to medical negligence and laid down the following principles: -