NISHA MATHUR Vs. MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner before this Court has been a patient of Dr. Tejashvi Kamra who is a surgeon. The allegation against the doctor by the petitioner is that he had committed a medical negligence in her case, while she was under his treatment. The matter was first taken by the petitioner to the Uttarakhand Medical Council and thereafter to the Medical Council of India. Both the bodies have found that there was no medical negligence on the part of the doctor. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, who was 56 years of age, at the relevant time, complained of lower abdomen swelling and discomfort and approached Dr. Tejashvi Kamra on 22.06.2015 for his advice. Petitioner was advised for an Ultrasound scan and certain tests. The Ultrasound report showed that the petitioner had distended Gall Bladder with a stone of eleven mm size in her gall bladder. At the same time, facial defect of size 2cm was also seen in anterior Abdominal Wall with herniated bowel and fat at the site of palpable lump. In other words, the petitioner was also to be operated for Hernia as well. As per the opinion of the doctor, since both the operations had to be performed i.e. operation of Hernia as well as that of gall bladder, the medical procedures prescribes that the gall bladder operation be done first and hence the petitioner was first operated for gall bladder on 11.07.2015. After the gall bladder operation was successfully performed by Laparoscopy, on 18.07.2015 the second operation for Hernia was performed. While the petitioner was still admitted in the Nursing Home of respondent no. 3 which is Dr. Kamra's Urinary and Surgical Diseases Centre in Dehradun, she complained of breathlessness on 20.07.2015. The petitioner was thereafter advised to be shifted to another higher multispecialty hospital i.e. Synergy Hospital in Dehradun, where the respondent no. 3 was also a visiting surgeon.

(3.) On 25.07.2015, the petitioner was found to have a foul smelling discharge from her laparotomy wound with passing of flatus and fecal fluid from the laparotomy wound. She also had a mild abdominal distension. Therefore, the diagnosis which was made by the doctor was that there was a possibility of a leak from her small bowel anastomosis site. In other words, it was the discharge from where the bowels were joined. Immediately an operation was performed. However, as the petitioner was not comfortable, she hence sought discharge from Synergy Hospital from where she was discharged and was later admitted to another hospital i.e. Asian Hospital at Faridabad on 29.07.2015, where according to the petitioner, her CT Scan was done and it was found that there was discharge of pus which had led to a septicemia. Then the necessary operations were performed at Asian Hospital, Faridabad and the petitioner was thereafter cured and discharged from the hospital. The petitioner is now ultimately cured. She then approached the Uttarakhand Medical Council alleging medical negligence against respondent no. 3. Her case was that after the second operation was performed, when she complained for breathlessness, and thereafter when faecal matters were passing from wounds of her bowel, a proper diagnosis was not done at that stage as there was no CT Scan. Had that been done, correct procedures could have been adopted there itself.