When it is a case of medical negligence, it need not be because of mens rea as intent: Supreme Court

By - Shriya Singh*

Supreme court in a recent judgment, held that in case of medical negligence, mens rea is inessential. The bench comprising Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Justice Sanjiv Khanna observed that “when it is a case of medical negligence, it need not be because of mens rea as intent. Sans mens rea in the above sense also it would still constitute offence of medical negligence.”.

The appellant had filed a case against the private respondent before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Patna, alleging offense punishable under Sections 304, 316/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Also Read - Explanation 3C to Section 43B(d) of Income Tax Act is clarificatory and does not purport to add a new condition retrospectively: Supreme Court

The Trial Court vide order dated 24.12.16 issued summons to the respondents in connection with the specified offense after hearing the testimony of three witnesses presented by the complainant/appellant and other materials on record. As a result, the respondents challenged the order in the Patna High Court which rejected it because there was no evidence of mens rea, or malicious or evil intent.

The view of the Supreme Court regarding the opinion of the High Court was that the High Court “completely glossed over the reasons which had weighed with the Trial Court…but was impressed by the fact that there was no evidence regarding mens rea, to show malicious or bad intent. This view taken by the High Court is erroneous.”

Also Read - Allahabad High Court dismisses PIL seeking framing of policy for home delivery of liquor

Further, the Supreme Court observed that the Trial Court did not insist on requiring the complainant to provide medical evidence or a medical examination to support his argument set out in the complaint as stated in the Supreme Court’s earlier decision in Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab & Anr. Therefore, the bench held that the appropriate course is to set aside both the orders of the Trial Court and High Court and refer the parties back to the Trial Court for further consideration of the matter.

“We make it clear that the Trial Court may have to call upon the complainant to first examine the professional Doctor as a witness in support of the case made out in the complaint and then proceed to consider the matter afresh on its own merits and in accordance with law”, the bench observed.

CLICK HERE TO READ ORDER.

*Shriya Singh is a 1^st year student pursuing B.A.LL.B.(Hons.) from National Law University, Delhi.