Opinion on Dr. Mrs. Pimple Case
To,
Dr. Shailesh Nikam,
Hon.Secretary,
NIMA M.S.B
Sub - Opinion on the Verdict of Hon.J.M.F.C. ,RLY. Aurangabad in Summary Criminal Case No.4152/2003, decided on 07/8/2012.
Ref.- Your request letter dt.29/9/2012
Dear Sir ,
After careful study & scruitiny of the papers sent by you in the abovementioned case,my observations and opinion are as under_______
This case had involved Two Major Issues :
1) COMMON ISSUE = Wheather B.A.M.S.Practitioners in Maharashtra can be held liable as RASH PER SE WHILE PRACTICING ALLOPATHY ? (Point No. 3 )
2) INDIVIDUAL ISSUE==Wheather Dr.Mrs.Pimple was Negligent while treating her patient or not ? (Point No.4&5 )
1) Common Issue===(Point No. 3 of the Verdict )-----This is the most important point for all the B.A.M.S. Practitioners in Maharashtra & we the prominent activists of N.I.M.A. must try to safeguard the professional interest of our doctors. Unfortunately The Hon. Court has declared Dr.Mrs.Pimple, NEGLIGENT (RASH) PER SE, only because she had used ALLOPATHIC Medicines, for her patient.As per the opinion of the Hon. Court, only M.B.B.S. DOCTORS can use ALLOPATHIC Medicines & nobody else. This remark of the Hon. Court is highly objectionable & an APPEAL MUST BE MADE IN THE SESSION COURT PRAYING THIS IMPUNED ORDER TO BE QUASHED AND SET ASIDE in view of the Verdicts of THE CONSUMER REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA STATE,MUMBAI ,IN THE FOLLOWING CASES, 1)Ankush Dhoble V/S Dr.Anant Bhosle---Case No.88 of 1997, decided on 08/7/2004
2)Mrs.Chitragini Mujmule V/S Dr. Manoj Jain & Ors.----F.A.No.863 of 2007 , decided on 05/11/2008.
Thus the major relief can be obtained in favour of Dr. Mrs. Pimple and for all the B.A.M.S.doctors in Maharashtra.
Point No. 2)----INDIVIDUAL ISSUE----(Point No.4 & 5 in the original Case)----This is not possible to give opinion on these issues as all the documents related to this case are not made available.
With Warm Regards From
Dr.Vinayak Mhatre
Chairman Legislation Committee,
NIMA MSB.
Dr. Shailesh Nikam,
Hon.Secretary,
NIMA M.S.B
Sub - Opinion on the Verdict of Hon.J.M.F.C. ,RLY. Aurangabad in Summary Criminal Case No.4152/2003, decided on 07/8/2012.
Ref.- Your request letter dt.29/9/2012
Dear Sir ,
After careful study & scruitiny of the papers sent by you in the abovementioned case,my observations and opinion are as under_______
This case had involved Two Major Issues :
1) COMMON ISSUE = Wheather B.A.M.S.Practitioners in Maharashtra can be held liable as RASH PER SE WHILE PRACTICING ALLOPATHY ? (Point No. 3 )
2) INDIVIDUAL ISSUE==Wheather Dr.Mrs.Pimple was Negligent while treating her patient or not ? (Point No.4&5 )
1) Common Issue===(Point No. 3 of the Verdict )-----This is the most important point for all the B.A.M.S. Practitioners in Maharashtra & we the prominent activists of N.I.M.A. must try to safeguard the professional interest of our doctors. Unfortunately The Hon. Court has declared Dr.Mrs.Pimple, NEGLIGENT (RASH) PER SE, only because she had used ALLOPATHIC Medicines, for her patient.As per the opinion of the Hon. Court, only M.B.B.S. DOCTORS can use ALLOPATHIC Medicines & nobody else. This remark of the Hon. Court is highly objectionable & an APPEAL MUST BE MADE IN THE SESSION COURT PRAYING THIS IMPUNED ORDER TO BE QUASHED AND SET ASIDE in view of the Verdicts of THE CONSUMER REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA STATE,MUMBAI ,IN THE FOLLOWING CASES, 1)Ankush Dhoble V/S Dr.Anant Bhosle---Case No.88 of 1997, decided on 08/7/2004
2)Mrs.Chitragini Mujmule V/S Dr. Manoj Jain & Ors.----F.A.No.863 of 2007 , decided on 05/11/2008.
Thus the major relief can be obtained in favour of Dr. Mrs. Pimple and for all the B.A.M.S.doctors in Maharashtra.
Point No. 2)----INDIVIDUAL ISSUE----(Point No.4 & 5 in the original Case)----This is not possible to give opinion on these issues as all the documents related to this case are not made available.
With Warm Regards From
Dr.Vinayak Mhatre
Chairman Legislation Committee,
NIMA MSB.