livelawpk.com - Special Enactments Acts Take Precedence over General Laws

Special Enactments like IHRA and PMDC Acts Take Precedence over General Laws like PPC --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad

5 months, 2 weeks
202

Special Enactments like IHRA and PMDC Acts Take Precedence over General Laws like PPC --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad

Islamabad 06-07-2024: In a significant ruling, the Islamabad High Court has quashed FIR No. 823/23, registered against petitioners (doctors) from Medicsi Hospital, Islamabad, for alleged medical malpractice resulting in the death of twins during a high-risk pregnancy. The Court emphasized the necessity of handling medical negligence cases through specialized regulatory bodies and highlighted the importance of obtaining expert medical opinions before initiating criminal proceedings.

The complainant, Zain Ali Raza, alleged that his wife, Hoor Kamal Khan, experienced severe symptoms during her pregnancy, but the doctors failed to provide timely medical intervention. This, according to the complainant, led to the death of their twins due to severe placental abruption. The FIR was registered under sections 322/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC).

The petitioner's counsel argued that there was no direct evidence to support the offense under section 322 PPC and that the matter should have been addressed through a complaint before the Islamabad Healthcare Regulatory Authority (IHRA) under section 33 of the Islamabad Healthcare Regulation Act, 2018, rather than through criminal prosecution.

The respondents' counsel opposed the petition, asserting that the investigation was complete and that the petitioner had alternative remedies under sections 249-A and 265-K of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), making the quashing petition non-maintainable.

Mr. Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani noted the allegations of negligence and professional misconduct but highlighted the lack of direct evidence to constitute the offense under section 322 PPC. The Court stressed the necessity of obtaining expert opinions from regulatory bodies such as IHRA and PMDC before proceeding with criminal charges.

The Cases involving medical negligence should be primarily handled by IHRA and PMDC. The absence of technical expert evidence undermines the validity of criminal charges related to medical malpractice. Special enactments like IHRA and PMDC Acts take precedence over general laws like PPC. Complaints should be filed with appropriate regulatory authorities within specified timeframes.

The Court provided detailed definitions emphasizing duty of care, breach of duty, and resultant damage. The criminal prosecution should proceed only after regulatory bodies have conducted inquiries and provided expert reports. The Court referred to various precedents that support regulatory oversight before criminal proceedings. The Court has inherent powers to quash proceedings in exceptional circumstances when procedural requirements are not met.

The Court concluded by quashing the FIR due to the lack of technical expert evidence and directed the parties to seek remedies through the appropriate regulatory bodies. Additionally, the private complaint under section 319/34 PPC was stayed pending the outcome of expert investigations by IHRA or PMDC.

This ruling underscores the critical role of regulatory bodies in handling medical negligence cases and sets a precedent for requiring expert opinions before initiating criminal charges in such matters.