A patient receiving treatment for advanced colon cancer underwent surgery at a multispecialty hospital and later died from complications. The family blamed the surgeons, alleging negligence and abandonment during post-operative care. But on review, the consumer commission found that the medical team had followed standard cancer protocol — and that the complication involved was a known medical risk, not a lapse in care.
The patient had been diagnosed with sigmoid colon carcinoma, a serious and progressive condition that had already been detected months earlier at another hospital. Records showed that surgery had been advised repeatedly, but the patient and family had initially refused it. When they finally agreed to surgical treatment, the tumour was removed in a sigmoid colectomy, performed after due precautions.
The surgery went well for the first few days. Then a known complication emerged — an anastomotic leak, where the reconnection of the bowel begins to fail. The patient was shifted to another hospital and continued to deteriorate, eventually passing away. The family alleged poor surgical judgment, delay, and lack of monitoring — but they could not produce any medical expert opinion to show deviation from treatment standards.
The State Consumer Commission closely reviewed the records. It noted that anastomotic leaks are a documented risk in colorectal cancer surgery, particularly when the disease is advanced. Multiple hospitals had advised surgery earlier, which was delayed at the patient’s insistence — a delay that significantly reduced chances of recovery. The court also cited Supreme Court guidelines emphasising that medical negligence requires proof of breach, not simply a bad outcome or difference of opinion.
With no expert evidence against the doctors and no record of any procedural lapse, the Commission concluded that the treatment met accepted standards. It set aside the earlier finding of negligence and dismissed the claim.
IML Insight
Cancer cases often involve serious complications even with correct treatment. Courts look beyond outcomes and examine whether doctors followed protocol and exercised reasonable care. When records are clear and expert opinion supports the line of treatment, allegation alone cannot establish negligence.
Source : Order pronounced by Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 25th August, 2025.