The Kerala High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by two senior doctors seeking to halt criminal proceedings against them over the death of a 10-year-old girl in 2010, ruling that medical professionals cannot claim immunity from prosecution.
A division bench comprising Justice A K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A K refused to interfere with a state expert committee report that found the doctors guilty of gross negligence. In an order issued on August 4, the court noted that 16 years have passed since the incident without a trial commencing, warning that further delays would diminish public confidence in the justice system. The judges emphasized that no individual is above the law, stating that taking the Hippocratic oath does not absolve medical practitioners of their legal obligations under the country’s statutes.
Details Of The Hospitalization And Death
The case originates from an August 2, 2010 incident in which the young girl was admitted to Christian Mission Hospital suffering from severe abdominal pain and vomiting. Shortly after her admission, the attending physicians—Dr Reni Philip, now 62, and Dr Suma John, now 64—administered intravenous doses of 600 mg of Bigtum and 0.5 cc of Rantac.
Following the administration of the medications, the child displayed immediate signs of severe discomfort. She was subsequently transferred to the intensive care unit and later moved to another medical facility for mechanical ventilation. She died while receiving critical care in the intensive care unit. A subsequent autopsy report identified the cause of death as choking.
Legal Challenge And Panel Findings
Following a complaint lodged by the child’s father alleging criminal medical negligence, police registered a First Information Report and referred the case to the state’s two-tier medico-legal expert panel. While the apex panel initially issued two separate reports exonerating both doctors, the High Court previously annulled those decisions in earlier proceedings and instructed the body to re-evaluate the matter.
The panel’s latest assessment concluded that the doctors had been grossly negligent, prompting Dr Philip and Dr John to challenge the adverse report before the High Court.
During the hearing, defense counsel S Gopakumaran Nair argued that the committee lacked sufficient material to conclude gross negligence and contended that the absence of pediatric specialists on the panel invalidated its opinion. Opposing the petition, advocate Jacob P Alex, representing the victim’s father, submitted that the panel’s report represents scientific evidence to be tested at trial rather than a final determination of guilt.
Court Clarifications On Evidentiary Status
The High Court rejected the defense’s objection regarding the panel’s composition, noting that the doctors had raised no concerns about the lack of pediatric specialists when earlier reports had cleared them. The bench affirmed that it found no reason to question the competence of the apex body.
Furthermore, the court clarified that the expert panel report serves as expert evidence for the investigating officer to evaluate independently, rather than an official finding of guilt. The bench added that both doctors will have full opportunity to challenge the findings during the criminal trial.
