• 05 Apr, 2026

Medicolegal Updates

Supreme Court Issues Notice to Union Government and NMC on Plea to Exclude Doctors from Consumer Protection Act: A Turning Point for Medical Litigation in India

Supreme Court Issues Notice to Union Government and NMC on Plea to Exclude Doctors from Consumer Protection Act: A Turning Point for Medical Litigation in India

The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Union Government and National Medical Commission on a plea seeking removal of doctors from the Consumer Protection Act 2019. The petition challenges the inclusion of medical services under consumer law and raises concerns about defensive medicine, rising litigation and the doctor patient relationship.

Medical Examination of the Accused in India under BNSS sections: What Doctors must keep in mind

An in-depth analysis of medical examination of the accused in India under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. The article explains statutory powers, Supreme Court rulings, prohibition of potency tests, DNA and biometric evidence, custodial safeguards, and the ethical and legal boundaries doctors must follow in forensic examination practice.

Read More

NCDRC Slaps ₹1.25 Crore Compensation on Radiologist and Imaging Centre: Medical Negligence in Repeated Sonography During Pregnancy That Missed Deformities

In a medical negligence judgment, the NCDRC held a radiologist and imaging centre guilty for failing to detect severe fetal deformities during repeated sonography in pregnancy. The case involved a child born with limb reduction defects after four “normal” ultrasound reports. The NCDRC awarded ₹1.25 crore compensation for lifelong care and suffering.

Read More

No Cure Is Not Negligence: NCDRC Judgement Explains Why Failed Treatment Is Not Medical Negligence

The NCDRC has clarified an important legal principle in a medical negligence case from Maharashtra, holding that “no cure is not negligence” and that failure of treatment alone cannot be equated with medical negligence. In a case alleging post injection radial nerve palsy, the Commission found no proof of negligent treatment and dismissed the complaint against the doctor.

Read More

After Doctor’s Death in an Ongoing Medical Negligence Case, Does His Family Have to Pay Compensation? Supreme Court to Decide

The Supreme Court is examining whether compensation for medical negligence can be recovered from a doctor’s estate through legal heirs after the doctor’s death, even when the complainant has also died. The case raises crucial questions about survivability of civil liability under consumer law and could reshape medical negligence jurisprudence in India.

Read More

Chandigarh Consumer Commission Orders Healing Hospital and its Three Specialist Doctor to Pay ₹50 Lakhs After IV Cannula Leads to Gangrene and Amputation of Fingers

Chandigarh Consumer Commission ordered Healing Hospital, gastroenterologist, neuromedicine specialist and plastic surgeon to pay ₹50 lakhs after a routine IV cannula led to compartment syndrome, gangrene and amputation of four fingers. The patient suffered 85% permanent disability. The judgment exposes serious lapses in hospital monitoring and patient safety.

Read More

Uttarakhand Consumer Court Verdict: Max Hospital Ordered to Pay ₹10 Lakh for Lack of Informed Consent and Vicarious Liability

The Uttarakhand State Consumer Commission held Max Super Speciality Hospital liable after a patient died following a Dobutamine Stress Echo test conducted without proven informed consent. This landmark 2025 judgment explains how lack of informed consent amounts to medical negligence and why hospitals are vicariously liable for doctors’ actions.

Read More

Geetanjali Hospital ENT Surgery Case: NCDRC Upholds Medical Negligence, Reduces Compensation from ₹17 Lakhs to ₹10 Lakhs

A detailed analysis of the NCDRC judgment in the Geetanjali Hospital, Udaipur case where nasal polyp surgery without pre-operative CT scan led to subarachnoid hemorrhage and brain herniation. The Commission upheld medical negligence but reduced compensation, laying down important legal principles for doctors.

Read More

Exact Time of Death Cannot Be Determined by Rigor Mortis: Orissa High Court Ruling Explained

The Orissa High Court has clarified that the exact time of death cannot be determined using rigor mortis alone. This detailed medico legal analysis explains the limits of postmortem science, the role of rigor mortis, and why courts must not rely on false precision. An essential read for doctors, forensic experts, lawyers, and medical officers conducting postmortems.

Read More

Madras High Court Cracks Down on Illegal and Unscientific Potency Tests in Sexual Offence Cases

Madras High Court has strongly condemned the routine and mechanical use of potency tests in sexual offence cases, calling them unscientific and illegal. The Court has directed police and courts to stop insisting on potency tests and reaffirmed that such medical examinations have no legal or forensic value in proving or disproving sexual offences.

Read More