SC Declines DMA’s Plea for Doctor Protection, Cites Existing Laws

The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a plea from the Delhi Medical Association (DMA) seeking directions for the protection of doctors from violence, stating that existing laws already address such issues.

However, a bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Sanjay Karol, and Sanjay Kumar granted the Delhi Medical Association (DMA) the liberty to approach the appropriate forums if specific instances of violence arise.

“I had to visit a hospital recently and noticed placards stating that violence against doctors is a serious offense. You see, laws are already in place to handle such instances,” Justice Khanna told senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, who was representing the DMA.

The Top Court was hearing the Delhi Medical Association’s (DMA) petition, which sought directions to authorities to ensure adequate security at hospitals and medical centers to prevent attacks on doctors and healthcare workers by patients’ relatives and others. Hansaria submitted that the concern is about implementing preventive measures, as incidents of violence against doctors are occurring quite often.

Security Measures in Hospitals

Justice Khanna stated that the court cannot direct legislation and pointed out that nowadays, every hospital has a police officer or security in place to thwart any such incidents.

The senior advocate countered that this is not the case in all hospitals and that most medical institutions in rural areas lack such security apparatus.

Observing that anyone who indulges in violence can be dealt with under the Indian Penal Code, the bench said the only question is the implementation of the law. “We are not inclined to entertain the petition. In case of any difficulty in any particular case, the petitioner association of doctors is at liberty to take up the said issue before the competent court,” it said.

On September 5, 2022, the top court, while hearing the petition filed in 2021, said the Centre and state governments cannot be expected to provide security cover to private hospitals. It had observed that private hospitals and medical centers are business enterprises and must make their own security arrangements. Regarding government hospitals, security is arranged by the concerned hospitals.

Questioning Norms and Approach

The top court noted that a large number of hospitals, nursing homes, and medical centers in the country are private. It had also questioned the petitioners on what kind of norms could be laid in the matter and asked the association why it had not approached the high court on this issue.

The plea, filed through advocate Sneha Kalita, also sought directions to the Centre and states to establish a distress fund to grant compensation to the victims or the families of deceased healthcare workers, including doctors and nurses, in cases of violence. The petition claimed there is an increase in the number of such assaults and verbal abuse, and “extreme incidents of public lynching” that have led to the death of doctors and health workers.

“The petitioners are seeking appropriate directions in the form of guidelines to have a security system in place to ensure a safe working environment for the medical service personnel/professionals and the healthcare workers,” it said. “At present, there is no substantial central legislation that has a holistic mechanism of preventive, punitive, and compensatory measures to address the above-mentioned issues of violence against medical service personnel/professionals and the healthcare workers,” the plea stated.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, Other Courts, International