Open Access: View PDF

DOI: n.a

Abstract

The issue of medical negligence, particularly the distinction between civil and criminal liability, has been a source of confusion in Indian jurisprudence. The absence of a clear legal definition of medical negligence, combined with varying judicial interpretations, has complicated the adjudication of such cases. This paper examines the judicial framework surrounding medical negligence in India, focusing on landmark judgments like Jacob Mathew and Martin D’Souza. It explores the dilemma posed by the overlapping principles applied to both civil and criminal cases of medical negligence, addressing the confusion stemming from the interpretation of liability. The paper argues that there is no intrinsic distinction between civil and criminal medical negligence, as liability—whether civil or criminal—arises only after the negligence is proven. It also emphasizes the need for judicial clarity and consistency in applying legal standards to medical negligence cases.
 

Keywords : Medical Negligence, Civil Liability, Criminal Liability, Jacob Mathew Case, Martin D’Souza Case, Indian Penal Code, Tort Law, Consumer Protection Act, Judicial Interpretation

Corresponding Author : Vivekanshu Verma