Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Kerala High Court emphasised that nurses should receive legal protection from malicious prosecution and unwarranted arrests in alleged medical negligence cases, likening their dedication to that of “Indian Nursing Nightingales.” The court, underscoring the vital role played by the nurses, stated that “They should be given moral support by the society and government. They should be allowed to work without fear of any prosecution.”

Justice PV Kunhikrishnan presided over the case, which involved a petition filed by a nurse from the Taluk Headquarters Hospital in Cherthala, who faced prosecution under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) based on an accusation of medical negligence.

The allegations were brought forward by the father of a 10-year-old girl who had been treated at the hospital for diarrhea and vomiting. According to the complaint, the girl received initial treatment and was observed in the hospital’s ward, during which her condition seemed to worsen. Despite the father’s repeated attempts to seek attention from the attending nurse, he alleged that her responses were insufficient, ultimately leading to the child’s death. Subsequently, a criminal case was registered against the nurse alone, alleging negligence under Section 304A of the IPC.

The petitioner argued that the prosecution was initiated solely on the oral statements of the complainant without an independent expert opinion, thus lacking credible evidence of negligence on her part.

The court expressed, “Nursing is not just a job, its a calling. They are known as the backbone of the health care system. Nurses don't just care for patients, they care about patients.” Citing the precedent established by the Supreme Court, in the case of Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab, which detailed the principles of medical negligence and established guidelines for prosecuting healthcare professionals, the court concurred with the petitioner’s stance.“When it comes to the failure of taking precautions what has to be seen is whether those precautions were taken which the ordinary experience of men has found to be sufficient; a failure to use special or extraordinary precautions which might have prevented the particular happening cannot be the standard for judging the alleged negligence,” the court noted.

The court also called for the Kerala government to implement guidelines similar to those established for doctors in light of the Supreme Court's directives in the Jacob Mathew case. The court mandated that a complaint against a nurse in government service or private hospitals should not be entertained unless prima facie evidence, in the form of credible medical opinions, is presented to substantiate the charge of negligence.

The court further highlighted that many complaints are often driven by a desire for financial compensation rather than genuine concern for negligence, underlining the need for safeguards against such misuse of the legal system. The court warned that “a nurse in the Government service or in private hospitals accused of alleged rashness or negligence while discharging duty, may not be arrested in a routine manner (simply because a charge has been levelled), unless his/her arrest is inevitable for furthering the investigation or for collecting evidence or the investigation officer feels satisfied that the nurse proceeded against would not make herself available to face the prosecution unless arrested.

In light of these observations, the court quashed the proceedings against the petitioner, citing a lack of substantive evidence to support the allegations of negligence.

 

Cause Title: Celinamol Mathew v State of Kerala [CRL.MC NO. 5401 OF 2018]