![podcast](/storage/website_image/prodcast_1645079014.jpg)
V N Shrikhande v. Anita Sena Fernandes
- 2022-02-17
Citation: (1996) 4 SCC 332
In Poonam Verma vs Ashwin Patel, the Supreme Court differentiated negligence, rashness, and recklessness.
Facts
Decision
In this case, the respondent was a Homeopathic doctor, who prescribed an allopathic medicine to a patient. The patient did not respond to the treatment and subsequently, he died. It was held that the respondent was a homeopathic doctor and was not allowed under the law to prescribe an allopathic medicine. The respondent was held negligible and was ordered to pay compensation to the aggrieved party.
Analysis
The court in this case identified the difference between negligence and other conducts. A negligent person is one who unknowingly commits an act of omission and violates a positive duty. In this particular case, the doctor Mr. Patel in the due course of treatment was negligent in his acts by practicing the Allopathic system of medication, though he does not hold any actual locus of practicing the same. Any person who does not know a particular system of medicine but then also practices in that concerned system then he will be held guilty of medical negligence. This is part of the understanding of how the definition of “medical negligence” is argued today.