The Supreme Court on Friday strongly criticized an Ayurvedic doctor and a private hospital for failing to provide immediate medical treatment to a four-year-old rape victim in Ghaziabad in that case, calling it “not a measure of compassion and sensitivity.” It also said that institutions would be required to compensate the bereaved family voluntarily and that if they failed to do so the court would impose penalties.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana heard a petition by the father of the child, who has alleged serious lapses in the medical response and investigation of the tragic incident that occurred in March this year.
At the hearing the Bench expressed deep concern about the alleged refusal by an Ayurvedic practitioner to provide even basic medical care to the child despite her critical condition.
The Chief Justice made sharp remarks to the doctor about responsibilities of the medical profession.
"If you don't perform your duty you have no business writing 'doctor' with your name," the Bench pointed out, wondering whether the child was denied timely help because her family was poor and unable to afford treatment.
The court also observed that even if the doctor lacked the facilities of emergency treatment, basic humanity demanded that he help the child reach a hospital capable of providing appropriate medical care.
"If you had sensitivity, you would have gone with the child to another hospital. If you had any empathy, you would have taken her there yourself," the Chief Justice told the doctor.
The Bench also criticised the private hospital where the child was taken after the assault. The judges described the hospital's alleged actions as “most ruthless” and suggested it should voluntarily pay reasonable compensation to the victim’s family.
"If we take a penalty, it will have a chilling effect. Think of the compensation of victim and a reasonable amount to the family. You have acted in the most ruthless manner," the court observed.
The judges said that if the doctor and the hospital did not come forward with compensation voluntarily, the court could consider imposing costs during the ongoing proceedings.
Case of Rape and Murder of a four-year-old girl
The case relates to the rape and murder of a four-year-old girl in Ghaziabad on 16 March.
The child was taken away by a neighbour, under the guise of buying chocolates, the court said. When she did not return, her family searched for her and finally found her unconscious and covered in blood.
The petition claims the family first approached two private hospitals seeking emergency treatment for the child. But both institutions refused to admit her. She was later taken to Ghaziabad district hospital, where doctors declared her dead.
The child’s father then approached the Supreme Court and accused the police of not only medical negligence but also serious shortcomings in the investigation.
Supreme Court had earlier ordered SIT probe
And this is not the first time the Supreme Court has spoken out on what is a well-publicized case.
In April, while ordering a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe, the court had already noted what it described as a “complete indifference and insensitive approach” on the part of the two private hospitals and the local police.
At that time, the Bench had observed that one of the most disturbing aspects of the case was the alleged failure of institutions responsible for protecting and treating victims.
"The most shocking part of the alleged offence is that it exhibits complete indifference and insensitive approach of two private hospitals as well as the local police," the Chief Justice had remarked while leading an independent investigation.
The SIT was tasked with examining both the criminal case and the circumstances surrounding the medical response provided to the child.
Focus on Accountability
The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized accountability in cases when victims are vulnerable, and that was evident in Friday’s hearing. The Bench ruled the healthcare providers should respond in the immediate aftermath of a hospital emergency, no matter what financial status or the treatment facilities at the hospital.
The observations made the case for empathy and timely medical intervention especially for children and victims of serious crimes.
The matter was to come up for hearing again next week when the court is to review the investigation and take further action against the medical institutions.
This case has once more brought home the necessity and urgency of timely emergency medical care, effective policing and institutional accountability in cases of crimes against children. And the Supreme Court’s comments will be of great use to the discussion on legal and ethical duties of healthcare providers in India at the time.
