SC Issues Notice To Govt on ‘Doctors Judging Doctors’ Rule; Negligence Laws Under Review After 20 Years
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued a notice to the Union and State governments on December 2, 2025, responding to the PIL files by Sameeksha foundation.
The plea highlights a critical legislative gap: despite the landmark Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab judgment in 2005 calling for specific statutory rules to govern the arrest and prosecution of doctors, the government has failed to frame these laws for over 20 years.
Because no specific laws exist, police currently rely on “executive instructions” or ad-hoc guidelines, leading to confusion and, often, harassment of doctors.
- Mumbai Medical College Ragging: Student Allegedly Forced to Offer Namaz; Two Suspended
- NMC Withdraws Permission for Vaishno Devi Medical College (SMVDIME); 50 Students to be Shifted
“Doctors Judging Doctors”
Right now, before a police officer can register an FIR or arrest a doctor for negligence, they must get a “prima facie” opinion from a government medical board.
The PIL claims this system is biased. They argue that when a board is made up entirely of doctors, they naturally tend to protect their own colleagues (“fraternity bias“), leaving victims with no hope for justice.
They want these “pure medical boards” replaced with Multi-Stakeholder Panels that would include:
• Retired Judges
• Civil Society Members
• Patient Representatives
• Independent Medical Experts (not just local colleagues)
The Supreme Court is now effectively asking to the govt. that Why haven’t you made the rules yet, and is the current system of doctor-led boards actually fair?
Why this matters to you:
If the Supreme Court rules in favor of this PIL, the protective shield of “medical boards” could be weakened or replaced by mixed panels involving non-doctors (judges/activists). This could drastically change how negligence accusations are handled, potentially making it easier for patients to push for FIRs against doctors.