Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court

Medical Negligence | State Liable for Loss of Vision in Botched Cataract Surgeries: Gauhati High Court Awards Compensation

07 December 2025 11:50 AM

By: Admin


“A claim based on strict liability made by resorting to a constitutional remedy... is distinct from, and in addition to the remedy in private law for damages for tort.”— In a seminal ruling the Gauhati High Court, comprising Justice Kardak Ete, ordered the State of Assam to pay compensation to seven victims who lost their eyesight following botched cataract surgeries at a Government Civil Hospital.

The petitioners, belonging to economically weaker sections, underwent cataract surgeries at B.P. Civil Hospital, Nagaon, between March 7 and March 10, 2017, under the National Programme for Control of Blindness (NPCB). Post-surgery, they developed severe irritation and complications. Upon being referred to Sri Sankaradeva Nethralaya, Guwahati, it was discovered that the surgeries were improperly conducted, necessitating the removal of the affected eyes to prevent further infection.

The Enquiry and State’s Admission

An enquiry report submitted by the Director of Health Services revealed that out of 41 cases operated, 13 developed severe complications. The report highlighted deficiencies in the hospital's infrastructure, specifically the Eye Operation Theatre, recommending its closure until renovation.

While the report did not explicitly pin "negligence" on a specific doctor, it acknowledged the institutional failure. The State, represented by the Additional Advocate General, fairly admitted liability and proposed a compensation amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- per victim.

Public Law Remedy

Justice Ete invoked Article 21 of the Constitution, citing the Supreme Court’s landmark rulings in Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity (1996) and Nilabati Behera (1993). The Court emphasized that when fundamental rights are violated by the State or its instrumentalities—even through medical negligence in a welfare scheme—the Constitutional Courts have the power to award monetary compensation as a public law remedy. This is independent of any private tort claim.

Acknowledging the State's benevolent stance to pay without contesting the negligence claim further, the Court directed the State of Assam to pay Rs. 4,00,000/- (Four Lakhs) to each of the seven petitioners (or their legal heirs) within six weeks. The Court clarified that this relief extends to all similarly placed victims of this incident, irrespective of whether they approached the Court.

Date of Decision: 27th November, 2025

Latest Legal News