Now Reading: Kerala HC orders SIT probe into cosmetic surgery negligence case
-
01
Kerala HC orders SIT probe into cosmetic surgery negligence case
The Story in Brief
The Kerala High Court has ordered a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe by the State Crime Branch into alleged medical negligence faced by a 31-year-old software engineer after cosmetic surgery in Thiruvananthapuram in 2025. Justice G Girish directed the SIT be formed within two weeks and complete its investigation within six months, focusing on whether performing complex procedures at a day-care centre constituted negligence.
Neethu, from Sreevaraham, underwent liposuction, abdominoplasty and a Brazilian Butt Lift at Cosmetiq Hospital on 22 February 2025. She alleged complications led to 80% disability, including amputation of nine fingers (Onmanorama, LiveLaw) or four fingers and five toes (Medical Dialogues). The court noted the clinic was registered as a day-care centre, which under the Kerala Clinical Establishments Rules, 2023, can only perform procedures allowing discharge within 24 hours.
The court also observed that neither the district-level expert committee nor the state-level apex committee had adequately examined whether the surgery violated protocols. The court rejected the earlier police report seeking closure of the case.
Update, 30 October 2026: LiveLaw reports the High Court's order, citing case number 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 607, and specifies three aspects the SIT must investigate. Onmanorama confirms the woman lost nine fingers, Medical Dialogues reports four fingers and five toes. Both agree the court rejected the police closure report and found the district and state expert committees failed to examine protocol violations.
Indian Opinion Analysis
Onmanorama and LiveLaw report nine fingers amputated, while Medical Dialogues puts the figure at four fingers and five toes. All three outlets are straight news agency-style reports that agree on the core facts: the High Court ordered a Crime Branch SIT probe, questioned the clinic's day-care centre status for complex surgery, and rejected the police closure report. Onmanorama and LiveLaw lead with the amputation count and the court order, Medical Dialogues leads with the lower amputation figure and adds the detail that police sought closure after expert committees found insufficient evidence. The three sources together confirm the court's finding that both the district and state expert committees failed to adequately examine protocol violations. The next step is the SIT formation within two weeks and a six-month investigation deadline.
Coverage: 3 sources, 3 neutral
Sources (3): onmanorama.com (neutral report), medicaldialogues.in (neutral report), livelaw.in (neutral report)
This brief was synthesised by AI from the 3 sources linked above, so one read covers every framing they carry. Methodology and corrections.
