February 25, 2026 : The Uttarakhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has dismissed an appeal alleging medical negligence in a case involving the death of a six-month-old fetus, holding that the complainants failed to place any substantive medical evidence on record to establish deficiency in service or professional misconduct by the treating doctor.
The Bench comprising President Ms. Kumkum Rani and Member Mr. B.S. Manral upheld the order dated 18.02.2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haridwar, which had dismissed Consumer Complaint No. 143 of 2014.
The appellants, Neeraj Sharma and his wife Deepshikha Sharma, had availed pregnancy treatment at Raja Ram Hospital–Maternity & Trauma Centre, Haridwar, under the supervision of Dr. Sarita Gupta. As recorded in the order dated 24.02.2026 in Appeal No. SC/5/A/185/2019, the patient underwent regular check-ups and diagnostic tests between June and October 2013. According to the complainants, they were repeatedly informed that the reports were normal and that the condition of the fetus was satisfactory.
On the night intervening 26–27 October 2013, the patient developed abdominal pain and was examined by the treating doctor. Medication was prescribed and reassurance was given that there was no cause for concern. However, following continued discomfort, an ultrasound conducted on 07 November 2013 revealed that the fetus had died. The pregnancy was medically terminated the next day at another maternity centre.
Alleging that the fetal death resulted from negligent treatment and incorrect medication, the complainants approached the District Commission, which dismissed the complaint. They subsequently filed the present appeal before the State Commission.
In response, the hospital and the treating doctor contended that the patient had been treated strictly in accordance with established medical standards and protocols. It was submitted that timely ultrasounds and follow-up consultations had been advised and that effective monitoring depended upon the patient’s compliance with medical advice. The respondents also relied on medical records from the centre where the termination was performed, which indicated that the patient’s blood pressure and vital parameters were normal and stable, thereby refuting the allegation that her life had been endangered due to negligence.
The State Commission noted that the issue of alleged medical negligence had earlier been examined in criminal proceedings initiated by the complainant under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. An Expert Committee constituted during those proceedings had concluded that there was no negligence on the part of the treating doctor, and the complaint was dismissed on that basis. The Commission also took note of the order dated 19.06.2025 passed by the Uttarakhand High Court, which held that no case of medical negligence was made out against the doctor.
Further, the Ethics Committee examining the matter had concluded that the treatment administered was in accordance with standard medical norms and that no professional misconduct was established.
The Commission observed that beyond the allegations contained in the complaint, the appellants had not produced any independent medical evidence or expert opinion to demonstrate a breach of the standard of care. It reiterated the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Martin F. D’Souza v. Mohd. Ishfaq and Dr. Harish Kumar Khurana v. Joginder Singh, emphasizing that negligence cannot be presumed merely because treatment was unsuccessful. A clear evidentiary basis is required to establish medical negligence.
Concluding that the District Commission had correctly appreciated the material on record, the State Commission held that the appeal was devoid of merit and dismissed it. No order as to costs was passed.
Cause Title: Neeraj Sharma & Anr. vs Raja Ram Hospital–Maternity & Trauma Centre & Anr.
Case No.: SC/5/A/185/2019
Coram: Ms. Kumkum Rani, President; Mr. B.S. Manral, Member
Date of Pronouncement: 24.02.2026.
