Kolkata: A doctor cannot be held liable for negligence merely because an alternative course or a better treatment method was available, Calcutta high court held while quashing a criminal case against a gynaecologist from Alipore’s Woodland Multi-Speciality Hospital.
Father of a newborn had filed a case at Alipore police station against Pervinder Kaur alias Dr Parvinder Kaur and Dr Shantanu Roy on March 12, 2016. It was alleged that a “minor cut” was found over the baby boy’s head after C-section delivery on March 11 at 1:10 pm. The doctors informed him that a stitch would cure the cut.
But the father reiterated past experience where his elder daughter, born four years back, in the same hospital by the same doctors had suffered a similar cut which now is a hairless spot. He alleged medical negligence and mismanagement by the doctors in the birth of his second child.
Dr Kaur’s counsel argued that she had given her explanation to the medical council and they had opined, “...the fatal scalp injury which occurred inadvertently during the Caesarean delivery was properly managed. Necessary steps were taken for care of the wound by the accused doctors and the baby was discharged after healing of the wound, healthy and in satisfactory condition and therefore it was found that there was no negligence on the part of the treating doctors and recommended to close the case.”
Her counsel submitted that the complaint was lodged with “false, frivolous, and baseless allegations” to harass the doctor and tarnish her social image.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) reiterated: “To prosecute a medical professional for negligence under something which in the given facts and circumstances no medical professionals in his ordinary senses and prudence would have done or failed to do, the hazard taken by the accused doctor should be of such a nature that the injury which resulted was most likely imminent.”
In this case, the judge held there was “no rashness.” It was noted that there was an injury over the scalp area under the procedure adopted by the doctor having sufficient experience in the field but there were no allegations that doctors did not take appropriate steps. Moreover, there was no complaint regarding the wound not having healed.
On the contrary, the man chose the same doctor and the hospital where he alleged that his elder daughter suffered a similar injury mark four years back which “manifest the faith in the doctor.”