New Delhi: The Supreme Court (SC) of India has reaffirmed the essential requirement of a Res (thing) in medical negligence cases for the application of the legal doctrine Res Ipsa Loquitur, which means "the thing speaks for itself." The bench, comprising Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, issued this clarification while upholding a consumer commission order that denied relief to a woman in a medical negligence case.

In its recent decision, the Court emphasized that the Res Ipsa Loquitur doctrine is only applicable when circumstances strongly indicate negligent behavior by the accused party in a medical malpractice case. The doctrine can be invoked when there is a tangible Res present, solid incriminating circumstantial or documentary evidence, to establish the allegations of negligence.

The case that prompted this clarification involved a woman who claimed her husband died due to cardiac arrest, alleging that the hospital failed to provide adequate care from when he was transferred to a private room until his cardiac arrest. On August 30, 2010, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ruled that the woman failed to provide substantial evidence linking the patients heart attack to surgery or a lack of post-operative care. Dissatisfied with this decision, the woman appealed to the SC.

During the proceedings, the appellant contended that her husband had died from cardiac arrest, even though he had no history of cardiac issues. The appellants legal counsel further argued that at admission, the deceased had been informed that he would be moved to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) after the surgery. However, he was transferred directly to a private room from the recovery area. In response, the hospitals legal representative asserted that the patient had made a remarkable recovery after neurosurgery, with no postoperative complications, justifying the move to the private room.

The SC observed that the patient had no history of diabetes, hypertension, or cardiac problems. Consequently, it was challenging for the treating doctors or the hospital to anticipate a cardiac issue, especially since the patient had not complained of pain in any other body region besides the neck.

(Source:https://health.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/policy/no-case-of-negligence-if-complications-unrelated-to-medical-procedure-sc/104651550 )