A patient undergoing surgery for esophageal cancer received multiple blood transfusions during and after her operation. Her blood group had initially been recorded as B negative, but during a later admission, tests showed B positive. After receiving several units of B positive blood, she developed renal failure and died. Her family alleged that the hospital had transfused incompatible blood and then attempted to cover up the error by tearing the earlier report that showed her original blood group.

A young expectant mother, admitted to a private nursing home for delivery, lost her newborn within minutes of birth — and succumbed herself a few hours later to severe post-partum bleeding. Her husband alleged that the facility was unequipped for emergencies, that no blood was available when she began to hemorrhage, and that the delay in shifting her to a tertiary hospital cost her life.

The treating obstetrician and hospital countered that the patient had suffered atonic postpartum haemorrhage — a rare but catastrophic complication where the uterus fails to contract after delivery — and that every possible step was taken to stabilise her. They maintained that the bleeding had started suddenly, that blood was arranged within an hour, and that the patient was transferred to a referral hospital under active transfusion and oxygen support. Multiple medical boards, each constituted on the family’s complaint, reviewed the records and unanimously concluded that there was no medical negligence in the management.

A lab technician who worked at a city hospital was admitted there himself with acute abdominal pain. Tests confirmed a severe appendicitis with infection, and doctors advised an emergency appendectomy. The patient, however, insisted on undergoing a laparoscopic procedure instead of open surgery — and even signed the consent form himself, witnessed by a friend.

The next morning, while performing the laparoscopy, the surgeons encountered a severely inflamed appendix with pus and dense adhesions that made the laparoscopic route impossible. They converted to an open surgery, successfully removing the appendix and controlling the bleeding. The patient initially stabilised but soon developed complications consistent with disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), a known consequence of severe infection. Despite intensive care, he passed away that evening.

A man admitted with chest trauma after a fall began to show breathing distress, and imaging revealed fluid collection in his chest cavity. The treating surgeon decided to manage him conservatively, monitoring oxygen levels and vitals instead of immediately inserting an intercostal drainage tube. Within a short period, the patient’s condition worsened, and despite resuscitation, he died.

Following the incident, a medical board was constituted to assess whether there had been negligence. The board concluded that the doctor should have drained the fluid earlier and recommended criminal action. On the basis of that report, police registered a case of causing death by negligence against the surgeon — a step that brought his professional judgment under criminal scrutiny.

A woman admitted to a government hospital for delivery developed serious complications following a cesarean section (LSCS) and later died due to acute kidney injury. Her husband alleged that the surgical team caused the injury during delivery and failed to manage her condition properly.

According to the complaint, the patient was admitted with labour pains and was operated upon within an hour of arrival. The family claimed doctors demanded money, obtained signatures on blank papers, and concealed the fact that her condition deteriorated after surgery. She was later referred to a higher centre, but despite further treatment at multiple hospitals, she passed away a month later.

involving internal fixation with a metal implant. The wound, already contaminated when he was brought in, later got infected, and the fixation failed. Months of follow-up treatment led to instability, non-union of bone, and eventual disability.

The patient alleged that the surgeon had hurried into internal fixation before allowing the contaminated wound to heal, ignoring the standard protocol that called for external fixation in such cases. The doctor, in turn, claimed to have followed accepted medical practice and said he had advised the patient to seek expert opinion at a tertiary centre — an instruction the patient allegedly ignored.

A prisoner brought to a tertiary hospital after repeated seizures underwent a CT scan that showed a serious intracranial bleed requiring urgent surgical decompression. The on-call neurosurgery officer reviewed the scan, advised a repeat scan and pre-op investigations, and recommended emergency decompressive surgery once the fresh scan confirmed progression. The patient was posted for immediate surgery.

However, the hospital had only one available operating theatre at that time. Another emergency procedure was already in progress and a scheduled case was queued for the same theatre. Because the theatre remained occupied, the emergency brain surgery could not be started immediately; while waiting for the theatre to become available, the patient’s condition deteriorated and he died before the operation could take place.