{"id":385489,"date":"2026-05-29T12:30:53","date_gmt":"2026-05-29T07:00:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=385489"},"modified":"2026-05-29T12:17:46","modified_gmt":"2026-05-29T06:47:46","slug":"sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/","title":{"rendered":"Telephonic Advice on Post-Operative Painkiller Is Not Gross Criminal Recklessness: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> In a criminal appeal concerning prosecution of an anaesthetist for alleged medical negligence under Section 304-A<\/a>, Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (IPC) arising out of the death of a patient following piles surgery, a Division Bench of Pankaj Mithal<\/span> and Prasanna B. Varale*<\/span>, JJ.<\/span>, quashed the criminal proceedings against the appellant holding that continuation of the prosecution would amount to abuse of process of law.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the appellant had completed her duty hours after ensuring that the patient was stable and was not physically present in the hospital when the emergency arose later in the night. Holding that even if the appellant had advised administration of a painkiller over phone, the same constituted standard post-operative medical advice and not gross criminal recklessness, the Court reiterated that criminal medical negligence requires a much higher threshold, namely, an act “which no medical professional in his ordinary senses and prudence would have done or failed to do”. The Court further noted that the appellant stood completely exonerated in the parallel consumer proceedings, while the post-mortem report disclosed that the immediate cause of death was acute coronary insufficiency due to 80 per cent coronary artery blockage, thereby breaking the chain of proximate causation against the appellant.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The deceased, K.P. Muralidhar, was admitted to Dhanalakshmi Hospital, Kannur on 28 May 2002 for piles surgery, which was performed on 29 May 2002 under the supervision of the appellant, a senior anaesthetist at the hospital. After the surgery, the patient was shifted to the post-operative ward where his condition deteriorated during the night and he eventually collapsed at about 4.00 a.m. on 30 May 2002. The post-mortem report disclosed 80 per cent blockage in the left coronary artery and opined the cause of death as “acute coronary insufficiency”. The prosecution alleged that the appellant negligently failed to personally administer post-operative anaesthesia\/analgesia and instead instructed the attending nurse — Accused 3, to administer the analgesic “Sensorcaine”, following which the patient lost consciousness and died.<\/p>\n

Initially, FIR dated 30 May 2002 was registered only against the surgeon — Accused 1, under Section 304-A<\/a> IPC<\/a>, without any allegation against the appellant. Subsequently, a charge-sheet dated 15 April 2004 was filed against Accused 1—3 under Sections 304-A<\/a> and 34<\/a> IPC<\/a>. The Kerala High Court quashed the said charge-sheet with liberty to conduct further investigation. Pursuant thereto, an Expert Committee of 4 members opined on 10 July 2008 that the death occurred due to gross negligence of the hospital staff and that the same could have been avoided had the drug been properly administered by qualified personnel. Based on the said report, a fresh charge-sheet dated 9 September 2008 was filed against all 3 accused, whereupon cognizance was taken in C.C. No. 501 of 2008 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC), Kannur.<\/p>\n

The appellant thereafter unsuccessfully challenged the proceedings at various stages. Her second quashing petition before the High Court was dismissed on 22 May 2009 with liberty to seek discharge under Section 239<\/a>, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973<\/a> (CrPC). The discharge application filed before the JMFC was dismissed on 9 June 2011 and the revision petition thereagainst was also dismissed by the Sessions Court on 11 July 2018. A further petition under Section 482<\/a> CrPC<\/a> being Crl. M.C. No. 6415 of 2018 was dismissed by the High Court on 16 October 2024 observing that the appellant’s contentions could be raised during trial.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, parallel consumer proceedings initiated by the deceased’s family before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur culminated in an order dated 17 April 2017 holding the hospital liable for medical negligence while specifically observing that the appellant had not instructed the nurse to administer any injection and that the decision appeared to have been taken by the nurse and the surgeon. No personal liability was fastened upon Accused 1—3, though compensation of ₹ 12 lakhs was awarded against the hospital. The said order was challenged by the complainants only on the ground of inadequacy of compensation. Aggrieved by the High Court’s refusal to quash the criminal proceedings, the appellant approached the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

Also Read: NCDRC Awards ₹2 Crore for Wrong Kidney Removal | Gross Medical Negligence Ruling<\/a><\/p>\n

Analysis<\/h3>\n

The Court observed that the High Court failed to consider the expert panel report in its proper perspective, particularly the inconsistent and contradictory statements made by nurse — Accused 3, which were found to be devoid of evidentiary value so far as the appellant’s alleged rash and negligent act was concerned. The Court noted that the appellant had completed her shift at 5.00 p.m. after ensuring that the patient was stable and was not physically present in the hospital when the emergency arose at 8.00 p.m. It held that even if the appellant had advised administration of a painkiller over phone, relying on the on-duty hospital staff to execute standard post-operative pain management could not amount to factual negligence. The Court further observed that Sensorcaine was an appropriate analgesic for the situation and that any mishap occurred due to the alleged failure of the nurse to properly inject the medicine into the epidural space, which was beyond the appellant’s physical control.<\/p>\n

The Court also placed significant reliance on the appellant’s complete exoneration by the consumer fora, where the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum had categorically held that the appellant had not instructed the nurse to administer the injection, and the said finding had attained finality. Referring to precedents, the Court reiterated that criminal medical negligence under Section 304-A<\/a> IPC<\/a> requires a much higher threshold, namely, an act “which no medical professional in his ordinary senses and prudence would have done or failed to do”.<\/p>\n

The Court found that the prosecution lacked the essential ingredients of gross negligence or mens rea and further noted serious infirmities in the expert panel, particularly the absence of an anaesthetist in the four-Member Committee. It was also observed that the post-mortem report disclosed an 80 per cent coronary artery blockage and that the immediate cause of death was acute coronary insufficiency, thereby breaking the chain of proximate causation against the appellant.<\/p>\n

Decision<\/h3>\n

Holding that continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law, the Court allowed the appeal, quashed the High Court’s order and the criminal proceedings pending against the appellant, and discharged her from the offences alleged.<\/p>\n

Also Read:<\/span> Supreme Court: Criminal Case Against Surgeon Quashed <\/a><\/p>\n

[Supriya Kumari M.C.<\/span> v. State of Kerala<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 928<\/a>, decided on 25-5-2026<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgment authored by: Justice Prasanna B. Varale<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

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

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

Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings against an anaesthetist in a post-surgery death case, reiterating that criminal medical negligence under Section 304-A IPC requires gross negligence and proximate causation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67541,"featured_media":385490,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[44684,63858,3485,105554,105553,14551,5363],"class_list":["post-385489","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-justice-pankaj-mithal","tag-justice-prasanna-b-varale","tag-medical_negligence","tag-post-surgery-death","tag-proximate-causation","tag-s-304-a-ipc","tag-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSC Quashes Medical Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist |SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"SC quashes criminal case against anaesthetist in post-surgery death: holds no criminal medical negligence without gross negligence and proximate causation\" \/>\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\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Telephonic Advice on Post-Operative Painkiller Is Not Gross Criminal Recklessness: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"SC quashes criminal case against anaesthetist in post-surgery death: holds no criminal medical negligence without gross negligence and proximate causation\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/\" \/>\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=\"2026-05-29T07:00:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Medical-Negligence-Case-Against-Anaesthetist.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=\"Malika Bhola\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Telephonic Advice on Post-Operative Painkiller Is Not Gross Criminal Recklessness: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Malika Bhola\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Malika Bhola\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/45db260c9b47eac21ba4813c9a379af1\"},\"headline\":\"Telephonic Advice on Post-Operative Painkiller Is Not Gross Criminal Recklessness: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-29T07:00:53+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1068,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Medical-Negligence-Case-Against-Anaesthetist.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"Justice Pankaj Mithal\",\"Justice Prasanna B. Varale\",\"medical negligence\",\"post-surgery death\",\"proximate causation\",\"S. 304-A IPC\",\"Supreme Court\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"Supreme Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/\",\"name\":\"SC Quashes Medical Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist |SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Medical-Negligence-Case-Against-Anaesthetist.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-29T07:00:53+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/45db260c9b47eac21ba4813c9a379af1\"},\"description\":\"SC quashes criminal case against anaesthetist in post-surgery death: holds no criminal medical negligence without gross negligence and proximate causation\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Medical-Negligence-Case-Against-Anaesthetist.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Medical-Negligence-Case-Against-Anaesthetist.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Medical Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/29\\\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Telephonic Advice on Post-Operative Painkiller Is Not Gross Criminal Recklessness: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist\"}]},{\"@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\\\/45db260c9b47eac21ba4813c9a379af1\",\"name\":\"Malika Bhola\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4ad40b34c562bedc415034fbcc0dc38433e5ef0c1f736b1961a9ebb53b5a3a65?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4ad40b34c562bedc415034fbcc0dc38433e5ef0c1f736b1961a9ebb53b5a3a65?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4ad40b34c562bedc415034fbcc0dc38433e5ef0c1f736b1961a9ebb53b5a3a65?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Malika Bhola\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/malika-bhola\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"SC Quashes Medical Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist |SCC Times","description":"SC quashes criminal case against anaesthetist in post-surgery death: holds no criminal medical negligence without gross negligence and proximate causation","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\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Telephonic Advice on Post-Operative Painkiller Is Not Gross Criminal Recklessness: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist","og_description":"SC quashes criminal case against anaesthetist in post-surgery death: holds no criminal medical negligence without gross negligence and proximate causation","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-05-29T07:00:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Medical-Negligence-Case-Against-Anaesthetist.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Malika Bhola","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Telephonic Advice on Post-Operative Painkiller Is Not Gross Criminal Recklessness: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Malika Bhola","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/"},"author":{"name":"Malika Bhola","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/45db260c9b47eac21ba4813c9a379af1"},"headline":"Telephonic Advice on Post-Operative Painkiller Is Not Gross Criminal Recklessness: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist","datePublished":"2026-05-29T07:00:53+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/"},"wordCount":1068,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Medical-Negligence-Case-Against-Anaesthetist.webp","keywords":["Justice Pankaj Mithal","Justice Prasanna B. Varale","medical negligence","post-surgery death","proximate causation","S. 304-A IPC","Supreme Court"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","Supreme Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/","name":"SC Quashes Medical Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist |SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Medical-Negligence-Case-Against-Anaesthetist.webp","datePublished":"2026-05-29T07:00:53+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/45db260c9b47eac21ba4813c9a379af1"},"description":"SC quashes criminal case against anaesthetist in post-surgery death: holds no criminal medical negligence without gross negligence and proximate causation","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Medical-Negligence-Case-Against-Anaesthetist.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Medical-Negligence-Case-Against-Anaesthetist.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Medical Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/29\/sc-quashes-medical-negligence-case-against-anaesthetist\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Telephonic Advice on Post-Operative Painkiller Is Not Gross Criminal Recklessness: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Negligence Case Against Anaesthetist"}]},{"@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\/45db260c9b47eac21ba4813c9a379af1","name":"Malika Bhola","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4ad40b34c562bedc415034fbcc0dc38433e5ef0c1f736b1961a9ebb53b5a3a65?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4ad40b34c562bedc415034fbcc0dc38433e5ef0c1f736b1961a9ebb53b5a3a65?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4ad40b34c562bedc415034fbcc0dc38433e5ef0c1f736b1961a9ebb53b5a3a65?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Malika Bhola"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/malika-bhola\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Medical-Negligence-Case-Against-Anaesthetist.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/385489","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\/67541"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=385489"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/385489\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":385493,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/385489\/revisions\/385493"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/385490"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=385489"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=385489"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=385489"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}