Police procedures no ground to refuse treatment to accident victims: Allahabad HC

Every doctor is under professional obligation to protect human life, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad HC observes

The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court on Friday said that hospitals and doctors cannot refuse or delay treatment to someone injured in a road accident on the ground that medico-legal formalities or police procedures have not been completed.

The court directed the UP government to file its counter-affidavit (reply) within 10 days, detailing the steps taken to ensure compliance with the Supreme Court’s directions. (For Representation)

The division bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla passed the order on September 25 on a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by one Anju Prakash Srivastava in 2000.

The court directed the UP government to file its counter-affidavit (reply) within 10 days, detailing the steps taken to ensure compliance with the Supreme Court’s directions and the guidelines issued by the Centre regarding treatment of road accident victims.

It hence directed the state to pay ₹25,000 as costs to the petitioner who has been pursuing the litigation since 2000. The matter will next be heard on October 1.

The court said every doctor has a professional obligation to protect human life and provide immediate medical care to an injured person, irrespective of whether the person was at fault in the accident or not.

It said procedural requirements cannot come in the way of this paramount obligation. The PIL included a photograph of a prominent hospital in Lucknow. The photograph showed a notice displayed on the hospital entrance stating that medico-legal cases, including burn and accident cases, were not treated there.

The petitioner had relied on the photograph to highlight alleged non-compliance with the Supreme Court’s directions.

During the hearing, the state referred to the Supreme Court’s 2016 judgment in Savelife Foundation and the guidelines issued by the ministry of road transport and highways on May 12, 2015, for protection of good Samaritans.

The guidelines state that failure by a doctor to respond in an emergency arising from a road accident may constitute professional misconduct and disciplinary action can be taken against the doctor.

The guidelines also require hospitals to display a charter at their entrances, in Hindi, English and the local language, stating that a bystander or good Samaritan who brings an injured person to the hospital should not be detained or asked to deposit money for the victim’s treatment. The guidelines are applicable to both public and private hospitals.

The high court further directed the state government to disclose in its affidavit the mechanism in place to monitor compliance with these directions, details of inspections of hospitals, the system for receiving and redressing complaints regarding violations, and, as far as possible, district-wise details of complaints received.