{"id":356934,"date":"2025-08-18T18:00:37","date_gmt":"2025-08-18T12:30:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=356934"},"modified":"2025-08-21T10:31:50","modified_gmt":"2025-08-21T05:01:50","slug":"ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/","title":{"rendered":"S. 304-A IPC attracted only when death is direct or proximate result of doctor\u2019s rash or negligent act: Kerala HC"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Kerala High Court:<\/span> The present petition was filed by the on-call Medical Officer (‘accused’) seeking quashment of criminal proceedings for medical negligence under Section 304-A<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’) in relation to the death of a remand prisoner. A Single Judge Bench of V.G. Arun, J., quashed the proceedings against the accused observing that a medical practitioner would only be liable under Section 304-A<\/a> IPC<\/a> if he would have committed a rash or negligent act that resulted in the patient’s death.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

A remand prisoner suffered multiple seizures on 11-01-2021 and 12-01-2021 and sustained head injuries after a fall. He was initially treated at local hospitals but due to lack of beds, he was referred to Government Medical College Hospital, Kottayam. Around 4:00 a.m. on 12-01-2021, after suffering another seizure, he was referred for neurosurgery consultation. The Senior Resident examined him and intimated the accused about his condition over the phone, who advised a CT-scan and pre-operative investigations to be prepared for emergency surgery.<\/p>\n

On 13-01-2021, when the accused’s duty ended at 8:00 a.m., another doctor (co-accused) assumed charge as the on-call Medical Officer. Despite recommendations for emergency surgery following worsening scan results, the procedure was delayed due to unavailability of the operation theatre. The patient died at 03:25 p.m. the same day, while awaiting surgery. An FIR was registered and his death led to public protests alleging custodial torture, prompting a Crime Branch investigation. An Expert Panel, constituted to investigate complaints against the doctors later concluded that the patient had not received reasonable medical care while undergoing the treatment, resulting in criminal charges under Section 304-A<\/a> IPC<\/a> against the accused doctors.<\/p>\n

The accused’s counsel contended that even if the prosecution allegations were accepted, the offence under Section 304-A<\/a> IPC<\/a> would not be attracted because the golden hour, as far as a person with seizure was concerned, was six hours and the inordinate delay in providing proper treatment and medication worsened the patient’s condition. By the time the accused was informed about the patient, 18 hours had elapsed after the first CT-scan. It was also the peak pandemic period, and the Government advisories prevented the accused from examining the patient physically. It was also submitted that, in the appeal filed by the accused against the Expert Panel Report, the State Level Apex Expert Committee held that there was no gross and culpable negligence by the doctors at the Medical College in giving treatment to the patient.<\/p>\n

However, the Public Prosecutor submitted that the matter was still under investigation and the investigating officer was not bound by the Apex Body’s findings. Therefore, if sufficient materials were gathered to prove the accused’s complicity, he could be prosecuted for the alleged offence.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision<\/h3>\n

The Court opined that while negligence was an omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulated the conduct of human affairs, would do, or the doing of something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do, medical negligence occurred when a healthcare professional breached his duty of care, causing harm to a patient.<\/p>\n

The Court referred to Suresh Gupta (Dr.)<\/span> v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi<\/span>, (2004) 6 SCC 422<\/span><\/a>, where the Supreme Court held that “for fixing criminal liability on a doctor or a surgeon, the standard of negligence required to be proved must be so high as can be described as ‘gross negligence’ or ‘recklessness’. It was not merely lack of necessary care, attention and skill”. Suresh Gupta<\/span> (supra) was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Jacob Mathew<\/span> v. State of Punjab<\/span>, wherein it was observed that “a simple lack of care, an error of judgment or an accident, was not proof of negligence on the part of a medical professional. As long as a doctor followed a practice acceptable to the medical profession of that day, he could not be held liable for negligence merely because a better alternative course or method of treatment was also available or simply because a more skilled doctor would not have chosen to follow or resorted to that practice or procedure which the accused followed”.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Court reiterated that a medical practitioner could be prosecuted for medical negligence only if the treatment adopted by him was contrary to the general and approved practice. Moreover, to attract the offence under Section 304-A, the doctor must have committed a rash or negligent act, and the death must also be the direct or proximate result of the rash or negligent act of the accused.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that the accused directed a fresh CT-scan as soon as he was informed of the patient’s condition and after receiving the report advised immediate surgery. The accused could also not be attributed with gross negligence for his failure to examine the patient physically since the COVID restrictions prevented it. Further, the accused’s duty ended by 8:00 a.m., and the delay in conducting the surgery occurred due to the non-availability of the operation theatre.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the Expert Panel had only opined that the patient had not received a reasonable standard of care while under treatment in Government Medical College, Kottayam, without naming any particular doctor. Further, that opinion of the Expert Panel lost its relevance in view of the conclusive unanimous opinion of the State Level Apex Body that there was no gross and culpable negligence on the part of the treating doctors for giving treatment to the patient.<\/p>\n

Consequently, the Court held that the prosecution of the accused for the offence under Section 304-A<\/a> IPC<\/a> amounted to an abuse of the process of the Court. The Court quashed all further proceedings against the accused relying on State of Haryana<\/span> v. Bhajan Lal<\/span>, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335<\/span><\/a>, wherein the Supreme Court had observed that an FIR was liable to be quashed when the allegations, even if accepted in their entirety, did not make out the ingredients for constituting the offence alleged against the accused.<\/p>\n

[Vinu V. Gopal v. State of Kerala, 2025 SCC OnLine Ker 6093<\/a>, decided on 29-07-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

For the Petitioner:<\/span> J. Vishnu, Anu Balakrishnan Nambiar, Advocates.<\/p>\n

For the Respondents:<\/span> Pushpalatha. M.K, Sr. PP.<\/p>\n

Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"penal<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“While negligence was an omission to do something which a reasonable man would do, or the doing of something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do, medical negligence occurred when a healthcare professional breached his duty of care, causing harm to a patient.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":356961,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[71458,2523,3485,36432,36431,87411,87410,34929],"class_list":["post-356934","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-justice-v-g-arun","tag-Kerala_High_Court","tag-medical_negligence","tag-medical-practitioner","tag-negligent-act","tag-rash-act","tag-remand-prisoner","tag-section-304-a-ipc"],"yoast_head":"\nS. 304-A IPC applies only if doctor's negligence directly causes death: Kerala HC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Kerala High Court clarified that Section 304-A IPC was attracted only doctor's negligence directly causes death of the patient\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"S. 304-A IPC attracted only when death is direct or proximate result of doctor\u2019s rash or negligent act: Kerala HC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Kerala High Court clarified that Section 304-A IPC was attracted only doctor's negligence directly causes death of the patient\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-08-18T12:30:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-08-21T05:01:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/doctors-negligence-directly-causes-death.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"S. 304-A IPC attracted only when death is direct or proximate result of doctor\u2019s rash or negligent act: Kerala HC\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/\",\"name\":\"S. 304-A IPC applies only if doctor's negligence directly causes death: Kerala HC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/doctors-negligence-directly-causes-death.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-08-18T12:30:37+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-08-21T05:01:50+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Kerala High Court clarified that Section 304-A IPC was attracted only doctor's negligence directly causes death of the patient\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/doctors-negligence-directly-causes-death.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/doctors-negligence-directly-causes-death.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"doctor's negligence directly causes death\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"S. 304-A IPC attracted only when death is direct or proximate result of doctor\u2019s rash or negligent act: Kerala HC\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"S. 304-A IPC applies only if doctor's negligence directly causes death: Kerala HC | SCC Times","description":"Kerala High Court clarified that Section 304-A IPC was attracted only doctor's negligence directly causes death of the patient","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"S. 304-A IPC attracted only when death is direct or proximate result of doctor\u2019s rash or negligent act: Kerala HC","og_description":"Kerala High Court clarified that Section 304-A IPC was attracted only doctor's negligence directly causes death of the patient","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-08-18T12:30:37+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-08-21T05:01:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/doctors-negligence-directly-causes-death.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"S. 304-A IPC attracted only when death is direct or proximate result of doctor\u2019s rash or negligent act: Kerala HC","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/","name":"S. 304-A IPC applies only if doctor's negligence directly causes death: Kerala HC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/doctors-negligence-directly-causes-death.webp","datePublished":"2025-08-18T12:30:37+00:00","dateModified":"2025-08-21T05:01:50+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Kerala High Court clarified that Section 304-A IPC was attracted only doctor's negligence directly causes death of the patient","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/doctors-negligence-directly-causes-death.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/doctors-negligence-directly-causes-death.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"doctor's negligence directly causes death"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/ker-hc-s-304a-ipc-applies-only-if-doctor-negligence-directly-causes-death\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"S. 304-A IPC attracted only when death is direct or proximate result of doctor\u2019s rash or negligent act: Kerala HC"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/doctors-negligence-directly-causes-death.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":377561,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/07\/del-hc-high-speed-not-sine-qua-non-to-constitute-offence-under-section-279-ipc\/","url_meta":{"origin":356934,"position":0},"title":"High speed not \u2018sine qua non\u2019 to constitute offence under Section 279 IPC; Del HC grants leave to appeal against acquittal","author":"Ritu","date":"March 7, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cPossibility of rashness and negligence by a driver cannot be negated on the mere account of low speed, especially when it is alleged that the respondent was driving a heavy vehicle, carrying material over the permissible weight limit, in a zig-zag manner prior to the accident.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Section 279 IPC","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Section-279-IPC.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Section-279-IPC.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Section-279-IPC.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Section-279-IPC.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":52911,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/06\/23\/compromise-betwen-parties-in-case-of-death-by-rash-and-negligent-driving-is-not-a-ground-to-quash-the-offence-us-304-a-ipc\/","url_meta":{"origin":356934,"position":1},"title":"Compromise between parties in case of death by rash and negligent driving is not a ground to quash the offence u\/S 304-A IPC","author":"Sucheta","date":"June 23, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court:\u00a0 Dismissing the criminal miscellaneous case where the petitioner having been\u00a0 charged under Sections 304-A, 279 and 338 of the Penal Code, 1860 for causing death due to rash and negligent driving, sought quashing of the proceedings on the basis of a compromise entered into by the parties,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":283908,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/14\/when-things-go-wrong-it-is-not-always-the-doctors-fault-kerala-high-court-acquits-medical-staff-in-negligence-case-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":356934,"position":2},"title":"\u201cWhen things go wrong, it is not always the doctor’s fault\u201d; Kerala High Court acquits medical staff in negligence case","author":"Editor","date":"February 14, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court acquitted the medical staff convicted by the Trial Court in medical negligence case and held that sufficient evidence is needed to prove death due to medical negligence, and that a medical professional cannot be held liable for mischance or misfortune.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Kerala High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-310.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":331845,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/26\/medical-practitioners-to-be-protected-from-frivolous-unjust-prosecution-bomhc\/","url_meta":{"origin":356934,"position":3},"title":"Medical practitioners to be protected from frivolous and unjust prosecution, particularly which are for extracting unjust compensation: Bombay HC","author":"Simranjeet","date":"September 26, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The report submitted by the Committee nowhere suggests that prescription of irrational combination of medicines by applicant is responsible for brain hemorrhage and consequential death of complainant\u2019s wife.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":299775,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/21\/orissa-hc-rejects-doctors-plea-to-quash-s-304a-proceedings-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":356934,"position":4},"title":"\u2018Doctor is always expected to treat or aid patient to best of his knowledge and ability\u2019; Orissa HC rejects Doctor’s plea to quash S. 304-A proceedings","author":"Editor","date":"August 21, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cNegligence is a breach of duty imposed by law and it may be either civil or criminal depending upon the nature and gravity of the negligence. Criminal negligence, on the other hand, is gross and culpable, neglect or failure to exercise, reasonable and proper care and precaution to guard against\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"orissa high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/orissa-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/orissa-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/orissa-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/orissa-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":328402,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/09\/prestige-apartment-girl-drowned-resident-association-negligence-karnataka-hc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":356934,"position":5},"title":"Karnataka HC charges Homeowners Association members u\/S. 304-A, IPC regarding death of a minor girl in apartment complex\u2019s swimming pool","author":"Sucheta","date":"August 9, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The police had initially charged the elected members under S. 304 of IPC; however, the Court upon prima-facie finding of negligence, quashed the charge under S. 304, IPC and charged the petitioners under S. 304-A, IPC.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Karnataka High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/356934","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=356934"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/356934\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/356961"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=356934"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=356934"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=356934"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}