In the case of Dr S Ganapathy v Lakeshore Hospital and Research Centre Pvt Ltd After being involved in a motorbike accident, the victim in this case was taken to the Mar Baselious Hospital in Kothamangalam. He was later transferred to the Lakeshore Hospital, where doctors declared him brain dead. After that, his liver and kidneys were removed. The Kollam-based doctor who brought attention to the problem by filing the complaint did so after reading about it in the newspaper. Further investigation revealed that the organ transplant was carried out in a flagrant violation of the law and with the parents’ misinformed consent.
The victim was allegedly refused appropriate care at both hospitals and against the law, his organs were transplanted into a foreign national. According to the report, no apnoea test was performed to assess whether the person was brain dead, and no blood was expelled from the cranium. According to the complainant, this might have saved a life. Furthermore, it was argued that the declaration of brain death was not made in accordance with the prescribed protocol.
Analysis of Court Decision
In response to a complaint alleging illegal organ transplantation, a Kerala court has issued summonses to the Lakeshore Hospital in Kochi and eight doctors. Judicial I Class Magistrate Eldos Mathew issued the order after concluding that a prima facie case had been established against the defendants under the Transplantation of Human Organs Act.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Lalankumar Singh v. State of Maharashtra, where it was determined that the order of issuing the process is not merely a formality, was cited by the Court. The court further decided that the Magistrate must exercise his judgement in determining whether there are sufficient grounds for proceeding in the case or not. The order must explicitly describe how such an opinion was formed. If no justification is provided for the decision to find a prima facie case against the accused, the ruling may be overturned. Without a doubt, the order need not include specific justifications.
The Court considered the complainant’s different arguments in light of this background. It was thought that the victim’s life might have been saved if the evacuation protocol had been followed, however, neither hospital made any attempt to carry it out. The Court also pointed out that the transplantation team had already seen the patient and a liver function test had been completed before brain death was officially declared. The Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1994 (pre-amended)’s sections 18, 20, and 21 were complied with by the complainant, therefore summonses were issued to each and every accused in light of this.