The Rajasthan High Court reiterated that mere dissatisfaction with the result of medical treatment, however tragic, cannot be a ground for criminal prosecution for medical negligence. The Rajasthan High Court quashed medical negligence proceedings against the doctors, holding that criminalising every clinical complication or suboptimal outcome would create a climate of fear, deeply impairing medical practice and public interest alike. The Court quashed an FIR registered under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) alleging medical negligence following the death of a patient after a fibroid surgery. The Court reiterated that mere dissatisfaction with the result of medical treatment, however tragic, cannot in itself constitute grounds for criminal prosecution unless supported by cogent evidence pointing to gross recklessness or culpable negligence. Also Read - Rajasthan High Court Directs State To Rectify Shortcomings In Regulations & Policies That Lead To Discriminatory Practices Against Females A Single Bench of Justice Farjand Ali remarked, “A doctor is presumed to possess not only clinical competence but also ethical awareness. It would be against the very fabric of medical ethos—and virtually inconceivable—that a skilled professional, consciously aware of the fatal implications of his actions, would proceed regardless.” Senior Advocate Dhirender Singh appeared for the Petitioners, while AAG Deepak Chaoudhary represented the Respondents. Brief Facts The complainant alleged grave medical negligence in relation to the treatment administered to his daughter-in-law (deceased) who was admitted to Vasundhara Hospital for a minor uterine fibroid surgery. It was alleged that the pre-operative surgical protocols, including the INR test, were not conducted. It was further alleged that the attending medical staff downplayed the gravity of her condition and attributed her non-responsiveness to minor cerebral inflammation without diagnostic confirmation post which, the deceased succumbed. An FIR was subsequently registered against the doctors. Also Read - Long Way To Go To Ensure That Every Girl In India Can Receive Quality Education; Govt To See That Every Child Completes Elementary Education:... Court’s Reasoning The High Court emphasised, “It must further be appreciated that a single adverse outcome, if even remotely attributable to a negligent act, has the potential to cause irreparable damage to the professional standing of both the doctor and the hospital. In a sector where public confidence serves as the cornerstone of survival, the mere perception of substandard care can derail years of painstakingly built credibility.” The Bench stated that “while assessing the question of criminal negligence, this Court cannot disregard the broader philosophical construct that underpins legal reasoning itself— that every culpable act must have a rational foundation in intent, knowledge, or gross omission. In the context of medical negligence, these three pillars must be rigorously tested.” Also Read - Courts Must Rise Above Rigid Arithmetical Calculations: Rajasthan High Court Enhances Motor Accident Compensation To Over Rs 1 Crore For Medical... The Court remarked, “The law recognizes that death is the inevitable conclusion of all life, and every death—even if occurring under clinical care—cannot be viewed as a consequence of criminal negligence unless supported by clear, cogent, and compelling evidence. To criminalize every clinical complication or suboptimal outcome would create a climate of fear, deeply impairing medical practice and public interest alike. It must also be emphasized that legal proceedings cannot be legitimately instituted solely on the basis of sentiments or emotional anguish, however intense or sincere they may be.” The Bench held that “it would be wholly unjust to subject the petitioners to the rigours of criminal trial when the cumulative material…fails to establish even a prima facie case of gross medical negligence…would also result in the undue harassment of medical professionals and strike at the very root of responsible clinical autonomy.” Consequently, the Court ordered, “Accordingly, in light of the authoritative expert opinion and in the absence of any credible material disclosing a prima facie offence under the penal law, further continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to FIR registered…would be an abuse of the process of law.” Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Petition.
https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/high-courts/rajasthan-high-court/fir-against-doctors-quashed-medical-negligence-2025-rj-jd-19994-vinod-shaily-v-state-of-rajasthan-1576865