Medical law and ethics: duty to treat accident victims: practice question

A Forensic Medicine question in the style of the NEET PG paper. Answer it first, then read why the right option is right and why each of the others is wrong.

Try it

Forensic Medicine · Medical law and ethics: duty to treat accident victims

Sample item

A seriously injured road accident victim is brought to a hospital. The staff refuse to start treatment until police formalities for a medicolegal case are completed. What does the Supreme Court's Parmanand Katara judgment say?

Original practice item, not a recalled exam question. Nothing here is recorded.

The answer and the reasoning

A. Every doctor must give immediate medical aid, and formalities must not delay treatment

In Pt Parmanand Katara v Union of India (1989) the Supreme Court held that a doctor, in a government or a private hospital, has a professional duty to preserve life, and must give immediate treatment to an injured person, without waiting for medicolegal or police formalities. Police matters are dealt with afterwards.

Option by option

  • A. Every doctor must give immediate medical aid, and formalities must not delay treatment (correct)

    Correct. Preserving life comes first, and formalities follow.

  • B. Only a government hospital is bound to treat the victim

    The duty applies to doctors in private as well as government hospitals.

  • C. Treatment can wait until the family pays a deposit

    Financial deposits cannot be demanded before emergency life-saving treatment.

  • D. Treatment may wait until the police arrive

    Waiting for the police would delay care and is contrary to the ruling.

Source note: Original NextPrep sample item — pending expert review. This item is original practice material awaiting independent expert review, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.

More Forensic Medicine questions

Questions about this Forensic Medicine question

What is the answer to this Forensic Medicine question?

The best answer is A, Every doctor must give immediate medical aid, and formalities must not delay treatment. In Pt Parmanand Katara v Union of India (1989) the Supreme Court held that a doctor, in a government or a private hospital, has a professional duty to preserve life, and must give immediate treatment to an injured person, without waiting for medicolegal or police formalities.

Why is "Only a government hospital is bound to treat the victim" not the answer?

The duty applies to doctors in private as well as government hospitals.

Why is "Treatment can wait until the family pays a deposit" not the answer?

Financial deposits cannot be demanded before emergency life-saving treatment.

Why is "Treatment may wait until the police arrive" not the answer?

Waiting for the police would delay care and is contrary to the ruling.

What concept does this question test?

It tests Medical law and ethics: duty to treat accident victims in Forensic Medicine. Police matters are dealt with afterwards.

How hard is this question?

We tag it as an application question: it asks you to use a fact on a patient or a finding. The tag is our own editorial judgement, not an official difficulty rating, so read the reason for every option, not only the answer.

How should I study Medical law and ethics: duty to treat accident victims?

Learn postmortem changes with their timelines, and toxicology as poison, sign, test and antidote. Then use the flashcards and the other Forensic Medicine questions on this site to test what stuck.

Is this a real NEET PG question?

No. It is an original practice item (editorial status: sample, version 1). NextPrep does not publish recalled or leaked questions, and independent faculty review of this item has not been completed yet, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.