Doctors can't treat patients without touching, says Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently refused anticipatory bail to a person who allegedly assaulted a doctor who was clinically examining his wife for inappropriately touching the doctor, saying that doctors cannot conduct a clinical examination of a patient without touching him. “Doctors who are required to treat patients as part of their oath will not be protected and if they are, the proper health care of the general public would be at risk. In such a case, arrest and custodial interrogation is absolutely necessary for a successful investigation and prosecution. Justice A Badharudeen said.

Justice A Badharudeen said that attacks against doctors while examining patients just because they were touching the body of patients cannot be supported at all. The High Court said that the attack on the doctor at the instance of the petitioner is well handled in this case and if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail in such a case, it would lead to a very dangerous situation.

“Physicians who have expended energy and time to learn a method of treating patients cannot perform the said exercise without touching the patients during the clinical examination of the patients. If a patient seeking treatment is harmed in the matter of touching the petitioner's body as part of the examination, it becomes difficult for the doctor to practice his medical profession by resorting to clinical examination. The same would include placing a stethoscope on the left side of the patient's chest to monitor and assess the heartbeat,” Justice A Badharudeen further said.

The High Court observed that genuine cases of this nature cannot be completely ruled out but generally it can be said that the veracity of such allegations should be evaluated from the materials and surrounding circumstances to separate the wheat from the chaff.

According to the indictment, on January 8, the doctor examined the 27-year-old wife of the accused at the scene of the accident, and the accused grabbed the doctor by the collar and hit him on the left side of the face and claimed that the doctor touched his wife's body. The accused pleaded his innocence in the high court and the allegations were false and the case was registered as a counter-blast to avoid legal consequences arising out of the case filed by the wife of the accused.

The prosecution strongly opposed the bail application of the accused and said that attacks against doctors are now on high alert and doctors are under threat and fear as they believe that they are involved in criminal acts while they are doing their duty by that they will examine patients through a clinical examination. examining and threatening doctors would harm the interest of people at liberty. “Granting anticipatory bail when prima facie offenses are committed would not only vitiate the investigation but lead to a traumatic situation. Therefore, I am not inclined to grant this petition,” the high court ordered, rejecting the accused's application for anticipatory bail.