AIIMS Rishikesh fined Rs 60,000 for wrong HIV-positive record

The Uttarakhand state consumer commission has upheld a negligence ruling against AIIMS Rishikesh for repeatedly recording a patient as HIV positive in its medical records, even though subsequent tests showed the patient…

The Uttarakhand state consumer commission has upheld a negligence ruling against AIIMS Rishikesh for repeatedly recording a patient as HIV positive in its medical records, even though subsequent tests showed the patient was HIV negative. The commission dismissed AIIMS's appeal on August 17 and directed the hospital to pay the patient Rs 50,000 compensation and Rs 10,000 litigation costs.

AIIMS Rishikesh fined Rs 60,000 for wrong HIV-positive record

The patient was admitted to AIIMS on July 15, 2014, and discharged the next day with a discharge summary stating he was HIV positive. He later tested negative at two Dehradun hospitals. AIIMS denied conducting an HIV test and argued the consumer commission had no jurisdiction because its services are largely free. The state commission rejected both arguments, noting AIIMS had charged the patient Rs 270 for investigations.

The commission said an HIV diagnosis requires special care due to severe social and psychological consequences, and that AIIMS's own discharge summary contradicted its denial of the diagnosis. It ruled that the hospital breached its duty of care and caused mental agony and stigma to the patient.

Indian Opinion Analysis

A wrong HIV label can devastate a patient's life, job prospects, marriage, insurance, and social standing are all at risk. The Uttarakhand consumer commission applied the same negligence test used in the Supreme Court's *Jacob Mathew* judgment: a doctor is liable only if they failed to follow standard protocol, not for a mere error of judgment. Here, AIIMS Rishikesh's own discharge summary repeatedly stated the patient was HIV positive, yet the hospital produced no test result or lab report to back the claim. That missing document, a basic diagnostic record, shifted the burden of proof onto AIIMS. The Rs 60,000 award is modest, but the precedent matters: government hospitals charging even small fees (Rs 270) cannot claim immunity under the 'free service' exemption in consumer law. The next watchpoint is whether AIIMS pays within the stipulated period or forces another round of execution proceedings.


Source: timesofindia.indiatimes.com

This story was synthesised by AI from the source linked above.

Ask their opinion on this story
They have read this article, our coverage, and the web.
AI simulations of historical figures. Responses are generated from the historical record, not authentic statements.

0 Votes: 0 Upvotes, 0 Downvotes (0 Points)

Share your opinion

Loading Next Post...
Search Trending
Ask their opinion
Loading

Signing-in 3 seconds...

Signing-up 3 seconds...

All fields are required.