KANHAIYALAL DUBEY Vs. SANJAY JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Factual matrix are that late Ashish Kumar Dubey was diagnosed on clinical test carried out by Shri Sai Pathology to be a case of Malaria. After he was taken to the hospital of respondent-Doctor, blood test carried out at hospital on 28th September, 2002 was found negative for Malaria Parasite when necessary injection and drugs were prescribed by Doctor. After Dextrose injection was administered, rigors surfaced on body and hence it was replaced by Dexona, Phenargan and Paracitamol. Since no improvement could be witnessed even thereafter, patient was removed to Christian Hospital on 29th September, 2002, where he was diagnosed to be a case of suspected Cerebral Malaria. Patient, however, expired in the aforesaid hospital on the same day.

(2.) Father of patient had manifolds complaints against respondent-Doctor and the hospital, particularly focusing on administration of Dexona, Phenargan and Paracitamol, which, in his views, was quite uncalled for to be administered to patient, which eventually caused his death. Though other objections too were raised by petitioner-claimant, those were nicely negated by State Commission. In a consumer complaint that was filed, District Forum found respondent-Doctor guilty of medical negligence, for hospital being not registered under the Rules and compounder and staff being untrained.

(3.) Patient was examined by respondent-Doctor as an outdoor patient. State Commission examined the issue as to whether the line of treatment adopted by respondent-Doctor was in consonance with accepted norms of medical science. There is no gain saying the fact that even though clinical test carried out by respondent-Doctor had shown negative for Malaria Parasite, Doctor had advised to continue tablet Malarid TS. Medical Officer of Block Civil Hosital, Lakhnadon was of the view that continuation of such ante-malaria treatment in a situation as aforesaid was fully justified. Opinion of Dr. J. J. Patley, M. D. (Medicine), Pathologist Dr. Harjeet Kaur and Dr. Adarsh Benn, M. D. also weighed with State Commission, which did not find fault with the line of treatment adopted by respondent-Doctor in given situation, particularly administration of Dexona. Except making some bald attributions, petitioner had failed to secure medical advice of an expert, which could militate against finding of a good number of doctors. There had been no evidence that the complications that followed with patient were direct result of medicines administered by respondent-Doctor. Even there be lack of care or an error of judgment or an accident, as was held by Honble Apex Court in the case of Jacob Mathew [2005 AIR SCW 3685], was not proof of negligence on part of medical professionals. State Commission too had taken notice of the following observations made by the Honble Apex Court, which are of significance in the context :-