Uttarakhand State Commission Dismisses Appeal In Miscarriage Case, Holds No Medical Negligence Or Deficiency In Service Proved Against Doctor
The Uttarakhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, comprising President Kumkum Rani and Member B.S. Manral, dismissed an appeal alleging medical negligence in connection with a miscarriage, holding that the complainants failed to produce any material evidence demon-strating lapse in the standard of care or professional negligence on the part of the treating doctor.
The Commission upheld the District Commission's order dismissing the complaint and concluded that no deficiency in service was established.
Brief Facts
Neeraj Sharma (Complainant No. 1) and his wife, Deepshikha Sharma (Complainant No. 2), had availed pregnancy treatment at Raja Ram Hospital–Maternity & Trauma Centre (OP No. 1) under the supervision of Dr. Sarita Gupta (OP No. 2). According to the complainants, during regular check-ups conducted between June and October 2013, they were informed that the fetus was healthy and all medical reports were normal.
On the night of 26–27 October 2013, Complainant No. 2 developed abdominal pain and consulted the treating doctor, who prescribed medication and advised further tests. The complainants alleged that despite persistent symptoms and repeated consultations, the doctor continued to assure them that the fetus was normal.
On 7 November 2013, an ultrasound revealed that the fetus had died. The complainants alleged negligence in treatment and claimed that they were asked to seek treatment elsewhere. On 8 No-vember 2013, they consulted another doctor, who advised immediate medical termination of preg-nancy. The patient subsequently underwent termination at another maternity centre.
Alleging deficiency in service and medical negligence resulting in fetal death, the complainants filed a complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haridwar. The District Commission dismissed the complaint. Aggrieved by this decision, the complainants filed the present appeal before the State Commission.
Arguments by the Parties
The opposite parties contended that the patient was treated in accordance with established medical protocols and standard medical practice. It was argued that the patient did not consistently adhere to medical advice, particularly regarding timely diagnostic tests such as ultrasound examinations.
They further submitted that medical records from the termination facility showed stable vital pa-rameters and normal blood pressure, thereby refuting allegations that the patient's life was endan-gered due to negligence. The hospital supported the treating doctor's submissions and denied any deficiency in service.
Observations & Decision
The Commission observed that the complainants failed to produce any medical evidence or expert opinion demonstrating negligence or deficiency in treatment. It noted that the Expert Committee constituted during related criminal proceedings had concluded that there was no medical negli-gence on the part of the treating doctor. The Commission further observed that the High Court of Uttarakhand had also held that no case of medical negligence was made out.
Additionally, the Ethics Committee examining the matter found that the treatment provided was in accordance with standard medical norms and closed the case.
The Commission relied on the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Martin F. D'Souza vs Mohd. Ishfaq and Dr. Harish Kumar Khurana vs Joginder Singh, reiterating that negligence cannot be presumed merely because treatment was unsuccessful, and expert medical evidence is necessary to establish medical negligence.
Finding no evidence of deficiency in service or medical negligence, the Commission held that the District Commission had rightly dismissed the complaint. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.
Case Title: Neeraj Sharma & Anr. vs Raja Ram Hospital–Maternity & Trauma Centre & Anr.
Case No.: SC/5/A/185/2019