Medico-Legal

" The Complaint for Rs.80 lakhs alleging that Sedatives should not have been given to Alcoholic Patient as it caused cardiac arrest and complications, was dismissed " http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetPdf.do… The State Commission of Maharashtra, in the case of Smt.Rohini H. Merchant & ors. V/s. Sir H.N.Reliance Foundation Hospital & anr. has dealt with important factors. Factual Matrix in short : 1. The deceased patient - husband of Complainant No.1 Mr.Harendra J.Merchant was a Captain in Navy. It was contdned that he gave up his habitual consumption of liquor 25 years back. 2.But in the year 2005, when he was sailing near Andaman and Nicobar Islands, after seeing the hundreds of people dying to the Tsunami, he was psychologically and mentally disturbed and signed off the ship in February 2005 and due to trauma, he again started consuming alcohol after a long gap. 3.That, to treat the patient for proper detoxification, he was admitted on or

Doctors, No need to have Shop Act License... 3rd Judgment on this point... The Division Bench of Hon. Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) in its comparatively recent judgment dated 21st October, 2016 has reiterated the earlier views in the case of Indian Medical Association V/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. (Writ Petition No. 4579/2005 ) 1. This is the 3rd Judgment on this Point which has relied upon 2 consecutive reported Judgments in the last year of Division Bench of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the Case of Dr. Kavita Pravin Tilwani V/s. State of Maharashtra (2015(2) Mh.L.J. 271, Cri. W.P. No.1731 of 2002) and Dr. Shubhada Motwani V/s. State of Maharashtra (2015 (2) Mh.L.J. 408) wherein it has been held in clear and in equivocal words that Doctors do not fall within the Definition of “Commercial Establishment” under the provisions of Bombay Shops and Establishment Act, 1948 (said Act) and the amendment introduced in 1977 by which the Government included Medical Practitioners i

"Informed Consent" in Medical Treatment is of Utmost Importance,  !! Many times Docs do not pay importance to this fundamental aspect. To avoid further complications of Medcio-Legal cases, every Dr. should follow the Principles relating to consent as envisaged by Hon. Apex court of India in the case of Ms. Samira Kohli V/s Prabha manchanda (2008) 2 SCC 1. : You may see this link :http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=30116 (i) A doctor has to seek and secure the consent of the patient before commencing a ’treatment’ (the term ’treatment’ includes surgery also). The consent so obtained should be real and valid, which means that : the patient should have the capacity and competence to consent; his consent should be voluntary; and his consent should be on the basis of adequate information concerning the nature of the treatment procedure, so that he knows what is consenting to. (ii)  The ’adequate information’ to be furnished by the doctor (or a membe

"Condom is not the Medicine and hence fixation of the ceiling price for condoms is impermissible in Law !!!" - Hon'ble Madras High Court, adopted the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court !! One never knows as to what kind of problems may come up before Courts ? The Delhi High Court was dealing with the core question of law as to Whether fixation of ceiling price under the provisions of the Drugs (Prices Control) Order (DPCO), 2013 for male contraceptives (condoms) is in conformity with the powers vested under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read with the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 in the case of RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) LTD. V/s. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ( see the Judgment http://lobis.nic.in/ddir/dhc/GRO/judgement/10-07-2015/GRO10072015CW77052013.pdf ). The Petitioner contended that the prices of condoms were not controlled previously, however by order dated However, by order dated 05.11.2013, the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority, Department of