Full Text (PDF)
Original Article

Medicolegal Practice: A Popular Concept

Promod Kohli, Vivekanshu Verma

Author Information

Licence:

Attribution-Non-commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)

This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.


Indian Journal of Legal Medicine 4(1):p 7-17, Jan-June 2025. | DOI: N.A

How Cite This Article:

Kohli P, Verma V. Medicolegal Practice: A Popular Concept. Indian Journal of Legal Medicine. 2025;4(1):7-17.

Timeline

Received : March 01, 2025         Accepted : April 05, 2025          Published : June 20, 2025

Abstract

Purpose: This study examines the evolving landscape of medicolegal practice in India, focusing on its incidence, legal frameworks, challenges, and recommendations for improvement. Methods: A review of legal statutes, case laws, and secondary data from academic journals and government reports was conducted. Key metrics included litigation trends under acts such as the Consumer Protection Act (2019), PC-PNDT, MTP, and Transplantation of Human Organs Act (THOTA). Key Findings: Medicolegal cases in India have surged post-1995, with medical negligence constituting 40% of litigation. The Consumer Protection Act (2019) intensified accountability, while interdisciplinary collaboration among medicolegal consultants improved case outcomes. Conclusion: Strengthening ethical standards, standardized medical documentation, and continuous professional education are critical to enhancing medicolegal practice quality.


References

  • 1.   Consumer Protection Act 1987 (India).
  • 2.   Consumer Protection Act (Amendment) 2019 (India).
  • 3.   Singh JS. Commentary on Consumer Protection Act (CPA) amendments. Lexman. 2019.
  • 4.   V.P. Shantha v Indian Medical Association. AIR 1995 SC 1.
  • 5.   National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. Annual Report 2018. New Delhi: NCDRC; 2019. Available from: https://ncdrc. nic.in.
  • 6.   National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. Annual Report 2019. New Delhi: NCDRC; 2020. Available from: https://ncdrc. nic.in.
  • 7.   National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. Annual Report 2020. New Delhi: NCDRC; 2021. Available from: https://ncdrc. nic.in.
  • 8.   National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. Annual Report 2021. New Delhi: NCDRC; 2022. Available from: https://ncdrc. nic.in.
  • 9.   National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. Annual Report 2022. New Delhi: NCDRC; 2023. Available from: https://ncdrc. nic.in.
  • 10.   National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. Annual Report 2023. New Delhi: NCDRC; 2024. Available from: https://ncdrc. nic.in.
  • 11.   Saha K. Medical Negligence Litigation in India: Trends and Challenges. J Leg Med. 2021;45(3):234–45.
  • 12.   State of Telangana v Mohammed Arif & Ors. 2020 SCC OnLine SC 1193.
  • 13.   State of Uttar Pradesh v Kuldeep Singh Sengar& Ors. 2020 SCC OnLine SC 200.
  • 14.   State v Siddharth Sharma. 2023 SCC OnLine Del 2121.
  • 15.   State of Andhra Pradesh v J. Srinivas Rao. 2021 SCC OnLine AP 567.
  • 16.   Dr. Kafeel Khan v State of Uttar Pradesh. 2021 SCC OnLine All 987.
  • 17.   Dr. P.K. Jayakrishnan v State of Kerala. 2022 SCC OnLine Ker 1456.
  • 18.   State of Punjab v Vikas Barala. 2023 SCC OnLine P&H 789.
  • 19.   State v M. Murugan. 2019 SCC OnLine Mad 1345.
  • 20.   Canterbury v Spence, 464 F.2d 772 (DC Cir 1972).
  • 21.   Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582.
  • 22.   Rogers v Whitaker (1992) 175 CLR 479.
  • 23.   Reibl v Hughes [1980] 2 SCR 880.
  • 24.   Kunal Saha v Dr. Sukumar Mukherjee (2013) 5 SCC 182.
  • 25.   Castell v De Greef (1994) 4 SA 408.
  • 26.   Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11.
  • 27.   Helling v Carey, 83 Wash.2d 514 (1974).
  • 28.   Foo Fio Na v Dr. Soo Fook Mun [2007] 1 MLJ 593.
  • 29.   B v Medical Council (2005) 3 NZLR 810.
  • 30.   German Federal Court of Justice (BGH). VI ZR 311/11 (2012).
  • 31.   French Cour de Cassation. Arrêt n°18-17.305 (2020).
  • 32.   Dr. Balram Prasad v Kunal Saha. 2014 (9) SCC 182 (SC).
  • 33.   Ibid.
  • 34.   XYZ Hospital v State of Maharashtra. 2021 Cr LJ 567 (Bom).
  • 35.   Apollo Hospitals v National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. 2022 CPJ 123 (SC).
  • 36.   National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. Annual Report 2022. New Delhi: NCDRC; 2023. Available from: https://ncdrc. nic/in.

Data Sharing Statement

There are no additional data available. All raw data and code are available upon request.

Funding

This research received no funding.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed significantly to the work and approve its publication.

Ethics Declaration

This article does not involve any human or animal subjects, and therefore does not require ethics approval.

Acknowledgements

Information not provide.

Conflicts of Interest

No conflicts of interest in this work.


About this article


Cite this article

Kohli P, Verma V. Medicolegal Practice: A Popular Concept. Indian Journal of Legal Medicine. 2025;4(1):7-17.


Licence:

Attribution-Non-commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)

This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.


Received Accepted Published
March 01, 2025 April 05, 2025 June 20, 2025

DOI: N.A

Keywords

Medicolegal PracticeMedical NegligenceConsumer Protection Act 2019Legal ComplianceHealthcare Litigation

Article Level Metrics

Last Updated

Friday 31 July 2026, 15:24:01 (IST)


838

Accesses

8
378
00

Citations


NA
NA
NA

Download citation


Article Keywords


Keyword Highlighting

Highlight selected keywords in the article text.


Timeline


Received March 01, 2025
Accepted April 05, 2025
Published June 20, 2025

licence


Attribution-Non-commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)

This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.


Access this article



Share