Click to play videoNew Delhi: A recent Supreme Court ruling brought some relief to the medical fraternity when it held that a medical practitioner cannot be held liable in case things go wrong. But what happens in cases where medical negligence is debatable?
It has been four years, and Aditya's grandfather Tej Singh is still fighting for justice, in what he believes to be a case of gross medical negligence.
Aditya needed to get laser surgery, to remove a growth in his wind-pipe. Minutes after his surgery, he was wheeled out and his grandfather saw burn injuries on his face and throat and 23 days later, Aditya passed away.
The post-mortem report from All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) told a different story.
AIIMS doctors says, “The mentioned burn injury, which is a primary cause of death was unwarranted. This speaks failure of taking required precautions, care and skill in adopted procedure. This is a case of gross medical negligence.”
WIth a post-mortem report like this one, it should be just a matter or routine for police to file an FIR. However, Tej Singh went to the police station and says that did not happen.
Lawyer Sanjana Bali says, "There was a massive cover-up and the police just fell in line. They sat on it for a month and then wrote to the Delhi Medical Council asking it to form a new committee of AIIMS doctors to re-examine the cause of death.”
When the Delhi Medical Council report came out on September 15, 2006, it categorised Aditya's death as a rare accident by a laser spark that occurs in one per cent cases.
After intervention by the Delhi Metropolitan Court and the Delhi High Court, Tej Singh finally managed to register a FIR on December 4, 2008.
But for this 75 year old lone warrior, there are miles to go before he can sleep.
Singh says, “They threatened me saying they will get me involved in some criminal case/”
The Supreme Court has recently ruled that 'a medical practitioner is not liable to be held negligent because things went wrong from a mischance or misadventure or through error of judgment. Aditya's lawyer however says this will not weaken their case.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
 |
 |
 |
|
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.