Yes, failure to diagnose a disease can be considered medical negligence under Indian law, but only if it meets certain legal criteria. In medical law, negligence is not simply about a mistake—it must involve a breach of duty of care that causes harm or injury to the patient. So, a doctor's failure to diagnose a disease becomes negligence if the following essential elements are satisfied: 1. Duty of Care: The doctor must owe a legal duty to the patient. When a patient seeks medical advice, the doctor is expected to provide treatment with reasonable skill and care as per accepted medical standards. 2. Breach of Duty: Failure to diagnose a disease may amount to a breach if: The doctor failed to examine the patient properly Ignored evident symptoms Did not order necessary tests Misinterpreted test results Did not refer the patient to a specialist when required This means the diagnosis was not made as a reasonable and competent doctor would have under similar circumstances. 3. Causation: There must be a direct connection between the failure to diagnose and the harm suffered by the patient. For example, if the delayed diagnosis led to the worsening of a condition, additional treatment, or even death, the doctor can be held liable. 4. Damage or Injury: The patient must suffer some form of injury, loss, or harm due to the misdiagnosis or delay in diagnosis. Legal Position in India: Indian courts follow the principles laid down in the case of Jacob Mathew vs. State of Punjab (2005), where the Supreme Court held that a doctor is liable only if his conduct falls below the standards of a reasonably competent practitioner in that field. Criminal vs Civil Negligence: If the failure to diagnose is gross and reckless, it may also attract criminal liability under Section 304A IPC (causing death by negligence). In other cases, the patient may file a civil suit or approach a Consumer Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, seeking compensation. Conclusion: Yes, failure to diagnose a disease can be considered medical negligence if it is shown that the doctor breached the standard of care expected from a reasonable medical professional, and the patient suffered harm as a result. Each case depends on the specific facts, expert evidence, and the seriousness of the omission.

Dear Client, Failure to diagnose a disease may amount to negligence in cases where such an act falls short of the standard of care expected of an ordinarily competent practitioner in that particular branch and results in injury to the patient. In India, issues of medical negligence are adjudicated under the Consumer Protection Act and also in tort, with certain courts testing the parameters of whether the doctor had failed to act as a "reasonable and prudent" professional would in like circumstances. There must be the establishment of duties of care, breach (understood to mean- misreading or overlooking of diagnostic evidence), causation, and damage. Landmark rulings of the Supreme Court and awards from consumer forums indicate that a series of judgments have found negligence in overlooking clear diagnostic signs in some cases- acute pancreatitis on ultrasound or fetal anomalies on scan- and awarded damages to the aggrieved. The Supreme Court in Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab AIR 2005 SUPREME COURT 3180 held that negligence arises when a medical professional lacks the requisite skill or in the exercise of that skill to the standard of a reasonably competent practitioner in that specialty diagnosis is a skill that any competent doctor must be able to: interpreting clinical signs and the results of investigations as would any other qualified colleague with like qualifications. Mere adverse outcomes or unsuccessful treatment do not equate to negligence if the standard care was followed (e.g., a failed surgery without breach). It needs to be shown that there was negligence, e.g., failure to diagnosis, was unreasonable and thus avoidable based on acceptable standard of medical practice. If a disease is not diagnosed, it would amount to medical negligence in India when it has become essential that the standard of care required for an efficient physician would have taken into account the symptoms and evidences and arrived at the appropriate diagnosis. Failure or negligence in interpreting diagnosis may lead to legal responsibility, as highlighted by case laws of judicial and consumer forums, with huge amounts of compensations being paid to the victims or their kin. It is therefore evident that maintaining diagnostic criteria is very crucial both in terms of the ethics and the law for the medical practitioners. I hope this answer helps. In case of future queries please feel free to contact us. Thank you.