In the landmark Indian negligence case Jacob Mathew v State of Punjab (2005), the Supreme Court laid down important principles. Which statement BEST represents the Court's standard for criminal negligence in medical practice?
- A Any deviation from standard medical care constitutes criminal negligence
- B Civil and criminal negligence standards are identical in medical cases
- C Criminal negligence requires gross negligence amounting to a mens rea — recklessness or indifference to an obvious risk of injury ✓
- D A doctor cannot be prosecuted for negligence unless the patient dies
Explanation
In Jacob Mathew v State of Punjab (2005), the Supreme Court distinguished between negligence actionable in civil law (a higher degree of care owed, compensated in damages) and negligence sufficient for criminal prosecution under Section 304A IPC (now Section 106 BNS). For criminal prosecution, the negligence must be 'gross' — involving a degree of recklessness or advertent indifference to an obvious and serious risk that goes beyond mere error of judgment or inadvertent mistake. The court also directed that before arresting a doctor for negligence, a prima facie opinion from a competent medical expert should be obtained. Simple errors in judgment are insufficient for criminal liability.
Reference: The Essentials of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology (Narayan Reddy), 34th ed.
High-yield for: NEET PGINI-CETNExTFMGEUSMLEPLABMRCP
Written and medically reviewed by the StethoPrep medical team.