The Punjab and Haryana High Court has clarified that medical negligence cannot be inferred merely from the failure of a surgical procedure to deliver the intended results.

Overturning the first appellate court's decision, the High Court reinstated the trial court's judgment, which had dismissed a woman's claim for compensation after she became pregnant following a sterilization procedure.

The court, presided over by Justice Anil Kshetarpal, noted, “The medical negligence cannot be assumed only because a surgical procedure has failed to achieve the desired result.” Relying on the Supreme Court's jurisprudence, the court underscored that “in absence of allegation that the Surgeon was not competent to perform the surgery or the surgeon was negligent, the suit for damages cannot be decreed.”

Case Brief:

The Punjab and Haryana High Court made its observations while hearing a suit filed by a woman seeking ₹90,000 in compensation with 18% annual interest, alleging medical negligence after she gave birth following a sterilization surgery. The trial court had earlier dismissed her claim, finding no evidence of negligence by the operating surgeon. During the proceedings, the woman admitted to signing a consent form acknowledging the potential failure of the operation and agreeing not to hold the medical authorities liable.

The operating surgeon, Dr. Hardeep Sharma, testified that no guarantees were given regarding the success of the procedure, and the patient was informed of its potential failure. The trial court concluded that the surgery was conducted by a qualified and experienced professional, and no negligence was established. However, the first appellate court reversed this decision, awarding the woman ₹30,000 in compensation with 6% annual interest, reasoning that sterilization should prevent further pregnancies and criticizing the state for not conducting follow-up checks to confirm the procedure’s success.

Representing the state, Senior DAG Salil Sabhlok referred to the Supreme Court’s 2005 ruling in State of Punjab v. Shiv Ram and Others, arguing that liability for an unwanted pregnancy requires concrete evidence of negligence during the procedure.

Considering the case's facts, the High Court emphasized that negligence cannot be presumed solely based on the failure of a surgical procedure. It reiterated that establishing liability in medical negligence cases requires clear and positive evidence, including expert opinions when necessary. The court found the appellate court's assumption of negligence unsupported by factual evidence and noted that the woman had signed a consent form explicitly stating that sterilization might not achieve the desired result, absolving medical authorities of liability.

Accordingly, the High Court upheld the trial court's findings and overturned the appellate court's order granting compensation.