Medical Negligence, Malpractice, And Liability In India
- IJLLR Journal
- 51 minutes ago
- 2 min read
Pratham Srivastava, D.A.V. Degree College, Lucknow (Affiliated to the University of Lucknow)
Medical negligence in India sits at a difficult crossroads between law, ethics, and the uncertainties of science. It is an area where the consequences of error are deeply human, yet the standards of liability must remain legally precise. Over the decades, Indian jurisprudence has attempted to strike a careful balance: ensuring accountability for genuine negligence while protecting medical professionals from undue harassment. This balance has acquired renewed significance in light of recent statutory transformations, particularly the transition from the Indian Penal Code to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the procedural restructuring under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. These developments, coupled with evolving judicial trends, signal a gradual but meaningful shift toward a more evidence-based and nuanced medico-legal framework.
At the heart of medical negligence lies the doctrine of duty of care. A doctor is not expected to guarantee a cure, nor to perform at a standard of perfection, but is required to exercise reasonable skill and competence consistent with the standards of the profession. Indian courts have long relied on principles derived from English law, particularly the Bolam test, which provides that a medical professional is not negligent if their conduct aligns with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical opinion. While this test has faced criticism globally for being overly deferential to the medical fraternity, Indian courts have adapted it in a way that accommodates both professional autonomy and patient rights.
The foundational case of Laxman Balkrishna Joshi v. Trimbak Bapu Godbole established the threefold duty of care owed by a doctor: deciding whether to undertake the case, determining the appropriate treatment, and administering that treatment with due diligence. These duties remain central to determining negligence. A breach at any of these stages, coupled with resultant harm, may give rise to liability. However, courts have consistently emphasized that a mere error of judgment does not amount to negligence unless it is so unreasonable that no competent professional would have acted similarly.
