On October 7th of this year, Babita Rai, a 42-year-old government school teacher in Jamshedpur, Jharkhand, was admitted to Tata Motors Hospital in the same city. She was scheduled for a hysterectomy and an oophorectomy two days later due to a 6 cm ovarian cyst. According to her brother Rajesh, Rai noticed a swelling on the left side of her stomach after the surgery, and four days later, on October 13th, she died from septic shock. Rajesh alleges that the family found the surgery consent form tampered with when attempting to obtain post-mortem records, claiming that the name of a senior laparoscopic surgeon had been struck through, and a junior doctor’s name had been added.
Rajesh contends that the senior surgeon couldn’t make it on time, and the junior doctor proceeded with the surgery instead of rescheduling. He also accuses the hospital of neglecting routine postoperative follow-up tests. According to Rajesh, his sister’s death resulted from “gross medical negligence.” Despite Rajesh’s efforts to seek justice for his sister’s death, he has not received a positive response from various government bodies.
Babita Rai is among the millions whose deaths are attributed to medical negligence every year in India. In a recent development, Home Minister Amit Shah announced that doctors would be exempted from criminal prosecution in cases of death due to negligence. However, Section 106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita (BNSS), set to replace the Indian Penal Code, still imposes a two-year imprisonment and/or a fine on convicted doctors.
The Indian Medical Association (IMA) advocated for this exemption, stating concerns about increasing criminal cases filed against doctors. The IMA reported around 98,000 deaths per year due to medical negligence and requested the BNSS to differentiate between medical “negligence” and medical “accident.” Critics express concerns that blanket exemptions for doctors might lead to increased medical malpractice, particularly affecting marginalized populations.
Bioethicists, lawyers, and the public argue for a more inclusive conversation on medical negligence, involving patient advocacy groups. Critics believe that due to the power imbalance in the doctor-patient relationship, negligence should warrant higher, not lower, punishment. There are concerns that blanket exemptions may disproportionately impact women, queer, and transgender persons, as well as those in rural areas. Critics emphasize the need for a nationwide survey to understand the scope of medical negligence before making decisions that favor doctors.
