Baseless Targeting Of Doctors Is Bound To Seriously Prejudice Public Interest: Delhi HC While Setting Aside MCI's Suspension Order
The Delhi High Court while hearing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has set aside an Order of the Medical Council of India (MCI) calling for the suspension of the Petitioner, Dr. Pramod Batra for a period of 3 months for allegedly falsifying medical records.
The Bench headed by Justice C. Hari Shankar held that “If one reads the impugned order, one finds no observation, or finding, to sustain the conclusion that the petitioner had falsified the hospital records. There is no reference to the precise record which the petitioner had allegedly falsified. The order must be precise and exact, regarding the record which was falsified, the manner in which it was falsified at the time when such falsification took place. Prior to arriving at such a finding, the concerned doctor has to be put on notice regarding all these aspects, so that he is in a position to respond”.
Further talking about the societal impact of such an order, the Court said “Striking off, from the Indian Medical Register, of the name of a doctor, partakes of the character of a civil death, insofar as the professional career of the doctor is concerned. The familial and societal ramifications of such a decision, which is bound to garner publicity, are also far and wide reaching.”
Senior Advocate Siddharth Aggarwal appeared for the Petitioner while Advocate T. Singhdev appeared on behalf of the Respondent.
In this case, the Petitioner was a radiologist practicing with Krishna Medical Centre (KMC), New Delhi. On May 12, 2007, a patient, Mamta Gupta got admitted with complaints of vaginal bleeding. Dr. Archana Kothari, was the gynecologist present at KMC. It was a case of complications from abortion.
On May 14, 2007, the patient visited KMC again. Dr. Archana Kothari suggested a clinical procedure of Dilation and Curettage (D &C) which required assistance of ultrasonological services. For this, the Petitioner was called. The Petitioner reached KMC and assisted with the same.
The patient however died after a few hours on the same day. Family members alleged medical negligence and approached the Police at P.S. Ambedkar Nagar. A notice was sent, under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, (Cr PC) to the petitioner on May 28, 2007.
A post-mortem was conducted for the patient. The Post Mortem report at Safdarjung Hospital recorded the cause of death of Mamta as “haemorrhagic shock, consequent upon perforation of the uterus, following surgical intervention.”
Consequent to the grant of personal hearing, the DMC, vide Order dated 4 February 2008, observed, with respect to the petitioner, thus: “In view of the opinion of the Delhi Medical Council as expressed hereinabove, the Delhi Medical Council directs the removal of names of Dr. Archana Kothari, Dr. Pramod Gupta and that of Dr. Pradeep Kharbanda for a period of 3 months from the State Medical Register of daily Medical Council”.
The petitioner appealed against the aforesaid Order dated February 4, 2008 of the DMC to the MCI, under Regulation 8.8 of the Code of Ethics Regulations 2002. The petitioner’s appeal was first placed before the Ethics Committee of the MCI which concurred with the findings of the DMC order. The decision of the Ethics Committee was put up to the Executive Committee of the MCI which stated that “Dr. Pramod Batra’s name has also to be removed from the Indian Medical Register temporary for a period of three months for falsifying the records as observed by the Delhi Medical Council.”
Aggrieved by the order of the MCI dated March 11, 2010, the Petitioner approached the Delhi High Court.
The Court upon listening to the submissions found that “the impugned Order of the MCI, even by itself, renders the outcome of this litigation a foregone conclusion. The petitioner is, clearly, entitled to succeed.”
Talking about the charges of falsification of records, the Court observed that “It is one of the most fundamental principles of natural justice, partaking of the character of audi alteram partem, that a person cannot be condemned for a misdemeanour of which he is not accused, and regarding which he has been given no opportunity to defend himself. The petitioner never having been put to show cause regarding any other allegation, including the allegation of falsification of records.”
Accordingly, the order by MCI was set aside.
CAUSE TITLE: Dr. Pramod Batra v. Medical Council of India. W.P.(C) 2242/2010