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.
Vivekanshu Verma. Vicarious Liability for Alleged Criminal Negligence by Iatrogenic Fentanyl Overdose. J Forensic Chemistry Toxicol. 2025; 11(1): 40–49.
Timeline
Received : January 10, 2025
Accepted : June 13, 2025
Published : June 30, 2025
Abstract
Background: Iatrogenic fentanyl overdose highlights the critical need for meticulous oversight in medication administration. The principle of vicarious liability in healthcare amplifies institutional accountability, particularly in cases alleging criminal negligence resulting in patient deaths. Recent Indian criminal laws, including the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), have introduced frameworks that influence these liability considerations. Objective: To analyze the legal and medical aspects of fentanyl poisoning under the lens of vicarious liability, using the reported case as a focal point, and propose preventative measures to mitigate such incidents. Methods: A detailed case analysis was conducted alongside a review of legislative changes and best practices for medication safety. The study integrates statistical trends and judicial outcomes to formulate actionable recommendations. Results: The malpractice lawsuit underscores systemic issues, including delayed care, excessive medication dosages, and procedural lapses. While judicial outcomes favored good faith protections, the case underscores the importance of institutional vigilance. Conclusion: Strengthening institutional protocols, legislative clarity, and professional training are vital to prevent medication-related iatrogenic injuries and to balance accountability with fair treatment in healthcare.
References
1. Gaur, K.D. Criminal manual: New Criminal Major Laws containing BNS, BNSS & BSA, 2023. Whitesmann. 2nd Ed. 2024.
2. Sanjeev Narula, J. Shiv Kumar vs. National Medical Commission & Ors., W.P. (C) No. 4828/2021. Date of Judgment: 20.12.2024. Delhi High Court.
6. Shishpal Shishu v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022 (9) SCC 782.
7. Jasdeep Singh @ Jassu e. State of Punjab, 2022 (2) SCC 545: 2022 LIVELAW (SC) 19.
8. Ibid.
9. Shyamal Ghosh v. State of West Bengal, (2012) 7 SCC 646: AIR 2012 SC 3539: 2012 (3) Crimes 97 (SC): 2012 CriLJ 3825: 2012 (6) SCALE 381.
10. Suresh Sakharam Nangare v. State of Maharashtra, (2012) 9 SCC 249: 2012 (9) SCALE 245: JT 2012 (9) SC 116: 2012 (4) JCC 2745 (SC).
11. Jagan Gope and Ors. v. State of West Bengal, MANU/WB/3020/2019.
12. Manish Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2019 VIIIAD (Delhi) 100.
13. Chandrakant Murgyappa Umrani and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1999 SC 1557.
14. Subran and Ors. v. State of Kerala, (1993) 3 SCC 722: 1993 (3) SCALE 370: (1993) Supp1 SCR 512: JT 1993 (Suppl.) S.C. 597.
15. Sewa Ram v. State of U.P., (2007) 15 SCC 75: 2007 (14) SCALE 145: 2008 Cri.L.J. 802 (SC): (2008) 39 OCR 472: JT 2008 (1) SC 136.
16. Doctors in India strike over violent attacks by patients’ families https://www.theguardian. com/world/2019/jun/17/doctors-in-indiastrike-over-violent-attacks-by-patientsfamilies
17. Sanjeev Narula, J. Shiv Kumar vs. National Medical Commission & Ors., W.P. (C) No.4828/2021. Date of Judgment: 20.12.2024. Delhi High Court.
18. Prakash, A. Ratanlal & Dhirajlal. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, 28th Ed. LexisNexis. 2025.
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.
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.