Usha Jagannath Kedar vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 15378 Bom

                                      1                 947-WP.5017-14.odt

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     947 WRIT PETITION NO.5017 OF 2014

                       USHA JAGANNATH KEDAR
                               VERSUS
               THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

                                      ...
                Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Jaware Vishnu M.
                AGP for Respondents-State : Mr. S. B. Yawalkar.
                                      ...

                               CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, AND
                                       S. G. MEHARE, JJ.

DATE : 26.10.2021

PER COURT :-

1. Pursuant to our order dated 02.09.2021, we had

expected the learned advocate for the petitioner to resort to

indepth research so as to assist the Court in making out a case

or as to what can be done to assess that there has been medical

negligence on the part of the operating surgeons, who are

alleged to have damaged the uterus and the bladder of the

petitioner while performing a C-section delivery. No doubt, the

life of the petitioner as well as the child have been saved.

2 947-WP.5017-14.odt

2. The learned advocate for the petitioner contends that as

the uterus was removed, the petitioner lost her right to be a

mother. However, he is not aware as to how many children

have been born to the petitioner.

3. We do find that after the surgery was performed on

26.12.2012, the petitioner had to be admitted in several

hospitals and was taking treatment for almost one and half

year. Naturally, the petitioner is aggrieved by the physical and

mental agonies and the expenditure that her husband had to

incur for her treatment.

4. Besides, citing a judgment delivered in Public Interest

Litigation, filed by Pratibha Shinde and others Vs. Principal

Secretary, Public Health Department, State of Maharashtra and

others (2021) 3 AIR Bom. Reporter 226 , he has not made any

research to assess as to whether there is any provision of law

which would enable the Constitution of Committee of a

Doctors to tender an expert opinion, keeping in view that the

Judges of the High Court are not expected to draw an

inference, without expertise or knowledge in medicine and

3 947-WP.5017-14.odt

surgery, as regards any act of negligence purportedly

committed by surgeons.

5. The learned advocate for the petitioner seeks more time

to research. In Pratibha Shinde (supra), considering the Covid

Pandemic, a three members' Committee was formed, on the

basis of which, compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- were granted to

the L.Rs of the patient Malati Nehete, who suffered death due

to the Covid infection and on account of lack of proper

treatment and her body was said to be lying near a lavatory for

a few days.

6. Keeping larger interest of the society in focus, we do feel

that this case needs to be dealt with delicately so as to ensure

that if there has been an act of medical negligence, the

petitioner should be compensated. However, we cannot rush

to a conclusion based on the submissions of the learned

advocate for the petitioner, which appear to be more from the

heart and the skeletal pleadings set out.

7. We, therefore, grant time to the learned advocate for the

petitioner to research and assist us so as to consider this case in

proper perspective.

                                      4                   947-WP.5017-14.odt


     8.      List this petition on 26.11.2021.




      (S. G. MEHARE, J.)                  (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

                                      ...

     vmk/-