W.P.(C)/5541/2018 of DR NILRATAN SAHA Vs MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+W.P.(C) 5541/2018 & CM NO. 21601/2018 & 25965/2018

versus

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA & ORS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R R16.08.2018

1.The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning theorder dated 12.04.2018 passed by the Executive Committee of MedicalCouncil of India (hereafter “MCI”), accepting the recommendations of theEthics Committee dated 08-09.03.2018 holding the petitioner guilty ofmedical negligence.

2.The Ethics Committee after examining the facts of the present caseheld the petitioner guilty of medical negligence on essentially five grounds.First, that no monitoring of the patient was done as there were no records ofCTG machine and there were no ultrasound findings. Second, that furtherantenately ultrasounds were not available to show or rule out the cordaround the neck of the fetus. Third,that the child was born with the cord

around the neck at 4.40 P.M. and there was nothing recorded to indicate orthat any resuscitation measures were undertaken to revive the baby. Fourth,there was no mention of the APGAR Score of the baby which could haveascertained the medical condition of the baby immediately at the time of thebirth. And fifth, that it was nowhere recorded in the notes that whether babyimmediately cried after birth or not.

3.The petitioner has referred to the ‘Bed Head Ticket’ in respect of thepatient. The said document indicates that the baby did not cry after birth. Italso indicates that resuscitation measures were taken – namely, intubation,chest-compressions, positive pressure ventilation – but baby could not berevived despite those efforts.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also states thatAPGAR Score was mentioned in the notes. The relevant extract of the saiddocument is set out as under:-

“---------Baby deliver---------

C/o. Baby did not cry after birth

HR-80/minute, RR-30/min. Gasping type.

Resuscitatedaccordinglywithintubation,chest-compression, Positive pressure ventilation

In spite of best efforts baby couldn’t be revived anddeclared expired at 5:15 pm

Signature ofPaediatrician”

5.It is thus apparent that that the Ethics Committee has failed to takenote of the aforesaid document.

6.In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside and the matter isremanded to the MCI to consider it afresh in accordance with law. Thepending applications are also disposed of.

7.TheMCIshallaffordhearingtoallconcernedparties(thecomplainant as well as the petitioner) prior to arriving at any decision.

9.Order dasti.

AUGUST 16, 2018P

VIBHU BAKHRU, J.