Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Hrishikesh Roy and Sanjay Karol, JJ. is going to examine whether the State Human Rights Commission (‘SHRC’) is empowered to examine a case of criminal medical negligence, when the National Human Rights Commission (‘NHRC’) has taken a contrary view in the favour of the petitioner. NHRC had refused to interfere due to the non-involvement of a public servant.
The NHRC issued the following directions:
“This case pertains to allegations of medical negligence by a private nursing home. Since no public servant is involved in this case the matter is dismissed in limine. The file be sent to Scrutiny Branch SB-II after issuing the letter.”
For understanding the developments in this matter, the following may be noted:
The petitioner is a medical practitioner who runs a Maternal Health and Research Centre for treatment through In-Vitro Fertilization (‘IVF’). The instant case refers to the death of a patient during treatment.
The Andhra Pradesh State Human Rights Commission in its order dated 12-1-2016 directed the Director of Medical Educationand the Commissioner of Police,for examination of the registration of the Health and Research Centre to give IVF treatment, the kind of treatment given to the deceased, and the drugs administered to the deceased during treatment.
When the matter reached the then Hyderabad High Court through Dr. Roya Rozati v. Andhra Pradesh State Human Rights Commission, WP 1646 of 2016, the Court observed that no adverse order has been passed against the doctor. While disposing of the petition, the Court also noted that the doctor may approach the SHRC for disposal of proceedings by providing relevant materials.
The petitioner challenges the final judgment by Hyderabad High Court in the present matter. The petitioner approached the Court to decide on “Whether SHRC has the power to examine a case of criminal medical negligence when a contrary view in favour of the petitioner was taken by the NHRC?”
The Court directed the matter to be posted after four weeks, while pleadings may be completed in the meantime.
[Dr. Roya Rozati v. Mohammed Humayun Ahmed Khan, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 166, decided on 17-02-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioners: Advocate -n -Record Nirmal Kumar Ambastha, Advocate Namit Saxena, Advocate Kapil Choudhary;
For Respondents: Advocate- on- Record Shibani Ghosh, Advocate- on -Record S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Advocate Lakshay Saini.