A man was rushed to a Delhi hospital in a collapsed state. Within minutes, he was declared “brought dead.” Yet what followed was not quiet closure—it was a 30-minute CPR attempt, a blood sugar test, and a bill of ₹13,602. The family paid, believing it was part of the hospital’s effort. The State Consumer Commission saw it differently.
The hospital claimed the CPR was requested by the patient’s son and performed in good faith. But the Commission wasn’t convinced. It noted that once a patient is declared dead, any further intervention must be clinically justified—not emotionally driven or financially motivated. Blood tests on a deceased patient, the Commission said, had no medical basis.
The CPR, too, lacked justification. What troubled the court most was the hospital’s tone: no remorse, no regret, no apology. “This leads us to believe this was not a solitary case,” the order stated.
The verdict was clear. The hospital was directed to refund the amount charged, compensate the family for mental agony, cover litigation costs, and deposit a sum in the Consumer Welfare Fund as punitive damages. But beyond the numbers, the case leaves a deeper question: when does medical effort cross into exploitation?
In emergencies, hospitals must act swiftly. But swiftness must not override sense. CPR is not a ritual—it’s a clinical decision. And when death is declared, the line between care and commerce must not blur. This case reminds us that medical ethics are not just about what is done, but why—and when.
Source : Order pronounced by Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 25th February, 2025.