0
0
Cuttack, April 30, 2025 – In a landmark judgment, the Orissa High Court has ruled that doctors cannot be subjected to criminal prosecution solely for prescribing costlier medicines, provided those drugs are not hazardous, substandard, or otherwise restricted by government authorities.
The decision came as the court quashed criminal proceedings against a senior doctor from SCB Medical College & Hospital, Cuttack, who had been accused of showing undue favour to pharmaceutical companies by prescribing more expensive drugs to cancer patients. The case stemmed from allegations that the doctor violated the Odisha State Treatment Fund (OSTF) guidelines, which support poor patients undergoing treatment for fatal diseases like cancer.
Court’s Observations
Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra, delivering the judgment, emphasized that the choice of medication is the “sole prerogative and expertise” of the treating doctor. The court noted that unless a prescribed drug is hazardous, of substandard quality, or specifically restricted, a doctor cannot be held criminally liable for their prescription choices-even if the drugs are costlier than alternatives.
The bench further clarified that patients have the right to choose their line of treatment based on medical advice and their financial capacity. The ethical, moral, and legal obligation of the doctor, the court stated, is to prescribe the best available treatment, especially in life-threatening conditions like cancer.
No Evidence of Wrongdoing
The court found that neither the government’s prescription audit nor the relevant screening committees had flagged any illegalities in the prescriptions under scrutiny. Additionally, there was no evidence that the doctor or co-accused had violated any OSTF guidelines, nor were there complaints from patients regarding the quality or necessity of the prescribed medicines.
The court also highlighted procedural lapses in the investigation, noting that the inquiry committee lacked relevant expertise and failed to follow principles of natural justice by not giving the accused doctors an opportunity to be heard.
Implications for Medical Practice
The judgment cautioned against criminalizing doctors for their professional decisions, warning that such actions could deter medical professionals from providing the best possible care. The court also clarified that attending conferences or having professional relationships with pharmaceutical companies does not, in itself, constitute criminal conduct.
Conclusion
The Orissa High Court’s ruling sets a significant precedent, reaffirming the autonomy of doctors in prescribing medicines and protecting them from criminal liability in the absence of clear evidence of wrongdoing. The court concluded that the initiation of criminal proceedings in this case was “ex-facie illegal” and based on unsubstantiated allegations.
Disclaimer:
This article is a summary of a recent judgment by the Orissa High Court, based on reporting from Medical Dialogues. The information provided is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For detailed legal interpretation or advice, please consult the official court order or a qualified legal professional.
Citations:
