New Delhi, Apr 23: The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to examine pleas seeking guidelines for protecting doctors from rising instances of assault and said it cannot be expected to do everything and monitor each activity.
A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Prasanna B Varale, while referring to a top court verdict, said related guidelines were already laid down and the petitioners were at liberty to file appropriate proceedings.
“You cannot expect the Supreme Court to do everything and monitor each and every activity,” the bench said.
When an advocate appearing for the petitioners referred to instances of assault on doctors, the bench said, “These are all very unfortunate incidents but the Supreme Court cannot monitor each and every incident sitting here.”
The bench was hearing three pleas filed in 2022 alleging rising case of assault on doctors and sought framing of comprehensive guidelines for their protection.
One of the pleas sought a CBI probe into the alleged suicide of a gynaecologist in Dausa in Rajasthan.
The gynaecologist killed herself in Rajasthan after being allegedly harassed by a mob following the death of a patient during her delivery on account of excessive bleeding.
On Wednesday, one of the counsel appearing for the petitioners referred to the top court’s October 21, 2022 order issuing notice to the Centre and others seeking their replies on these pleas.
One of the counsel appearing for the petitioners said the reality was than even if there was a judgement from the apex court, nothing changed on the ground.
“So what is the point in again giving guidelines?” the bench asked.
When the lawyer said Parliament had also considered this issue, the bench said, “It is for the parliament to do.”
When the lawyer argued that police should be trained to deal with cases of assault on doctors, the bench said, “These are all policy matters.”
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for one of the petitioners, said the concern was that liberally, police stations across the country were registering cases against doctors whenever patients unfortunately passed away during treatment.
“How can such a general allegation be made against all police stations?” the bench asked.
It said the apex court had already issued guidelines in its previous verdict and any violation of the directions would amount to contempt.
“How general directions could be given like this?” it said.
Sankaranarayanan said pursuant to the notice issued by the apex court in October 2022, four states filed their responses and they did not raise an objection on maintainability of the plea.
“So, once a notice is issued, the other bench cannot dismiss it (petition)?” the bench asked.
“If not frivolous, this is vexatious,” the bench said.
Sankaranarayanan said the issues raised in the plea were neither vexatious nor frivolous.
He said the previously issued guidelines of the apex court might not be exhaustive.
“I am saying, once this guidelines have been laid down by your lordships, then it has to be supplemented and strengthened,” Sankaranarayanan said.
The bench, however, observed, “It is for the parliament to enact a law on this.”
The bench was disinclined to examine the petitions and observed petitioners could approach the high court concerned.
Sankaranarayanan later requested that since responses have come from four states, the apex court may transfer the matter to the Delhi High Court.
The court noted the incident related to Rajasthan and said, “The other state government’s cannot be asked to go to the Delhi High Court.”
One of the pleas alleged that doctors were attacked across the country even if a patient died owing to health reasons that were beyond the control of medical professionals.
The plea, therefore, sought a direction to relevant stakeholders to evolve a mechanism to compensate the family and dependents of doctors who lost their lives to the cause of public service. (PTI)
