SUMAN K SHRIVASTAVA
Ranchi, March 29: The Jharkhand High Court has said that the entire medical fraternity cannot be blamed or branded as lacking in integrity or competence just because of some bad apples.
“It is true that the medical profession has to an extent become commercialized and there are many doctors who depart from their Hippocratic oath for their selfish ends of making money.
However, the entire medical fraternity cannot be blamed… just because of some bad apples,” a single bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi has observed.
Quashing a criminal case filed against Dr Vijay Kumar from Sahibganj, the court observed, “It is well known that inspite of best effort made by the doctor sometime they are not successful and this does not mean that doctor must be held guilty.”
Lawyer Pandey Neeraj Rai appeared for the doctor.
The case, in a nutshell, is that Dr Vijay Kumar, runs his clinic in Sahibganj in the name of Surya Nursing Home. On the fateful day the father of Md. Mukhleshur Rahman was admitted in the said hospital and operation of hernia was operated which was successful. The patient was brought to the ward. The
relatives of the deceased were waiting for consciousness of the patient. However, the doctor received information that condition of Rahman’s father deteriorated. He reached to the hospital and examined the patient and found that the latter had left for his heavenly abode.
On Rahman’s complaint before the National Human Rights Commission and National Minority Commission a committee was constituted to look into his allegation. The committee was headed by experts who were doctors namely, Dr. Pradeep Basky M.S. (General Surgery) and a qualified surgeon and Dy. Director Malaria-cum-State Malaria Officer, Jharkhand was the Chairman of the committee. Considering the enquiry committee report, the final form was submitted stating the mistake of facts. However, on the protest petition, the CJM Court took cognizance considering the solemn affirmation and deposition of five enquiry witnesses.
The court said that at least two judgements of the Supreme Court ruled that unnecessarily a bonafide action of any doctor may not be subject matter of civil wrong as well as criminal wrong.
Quoting Supreme Court judgements (Martin F. D’Souza V. Mohd. Ishfaq and Jacob Mathew Vs. State of Punjab), the high court said the case will be proceeded against a doctor after taking expert opinion and the case in hand expert report was there and thereafter a final form was submitted.
“In that view of the matter the Court finds that proceeding further on the protest petition when the finding of the expert committee is in favour of the petitioner amounts to abuse of process of law,” Justice Dwivedi concluded.
