There can be no denial of the fact that whosoever suffers a cataclysm must be reparated, rehabilitated and restored. Recuperation of the afflicted to the best possible normalcy illustrates good governance of a welfare state. welfare state. Compensation on account of medical negligence may have been conceptualized under similar tenants and perceptions. 

But the intricacies involved seem to have been created in the cloistered chambers of the executive overlooking the other side of the coin.

Working with weak infrastructure, non-uniform medical education, poor quality & inadequate number of supporting staff, and an overall inept system with lots of complexities have predisposed doctors to easy harassment.

If the act had proved to be an apostle of recompense mechanism in a balanced way and fostered discipline, we would have tendered no criticism, but since it comes to backlash undue stress, anxiety and tension to the recompenser, it should be shrunken, shortened and nose-dived without shilly-shallying.

Enforcing inordinately unaffordable indemnification to healthcare consumers (paying in lacs against a few hundred earned) copying Anglo-American states, without taking into account their lavishly paid manpower and exuberant infrastructure, can pave the way only to the extinction of infirmaries particularly small and medium ones which run on wafery thin margin yet form the spine of our healthcare providing affordable quality services at the doorstep of end users up to remote rustic areas. They cannot bear the brunt of unlimited, disproportionate, unconscionable and overabundant compensation. Fear and tension born out of the horrifying talons of the CPA refrain them from giving their best to society. They judiciously deserve to be precluded from being squeezed.

Aforementioned statements do not at all mean soliciting impunity for medical professionals against prosecutions arising out of deliberate rash and negligent acts. It, of course, is against indiscriminate, unjust, frivolous and vexatious lawsuits, summary trials on unsubstantiated accusations, labelling natural complications as negligence, and unwarranted indictment of doctors being easily identifiable persons among a host of other factors responsible for the mishaps. This has all morphed CPA into legal terrorism. Cost-free jurisdiction, invulnerability, and innocuousness of the act for a plaintiff are evolving a class of professional litigants (ambulance chasers) that may plunder one's lifetime savings pushing forcibly towards destitution.

Penalties being imposed on medics need to be tested on the anvil of the constitutional provision of the right to social and economic justice for all. Compensating in millions against a few hundred or thousands earned us unfair, inequitable, and cruel exploitation ultimately unaffordable. Akin to the snake-ladder play for the professionals, it doesn't withstand the test of viability.

The obligations of a democratic society, moral and legal, lie in collective consideration of the rights and privileges of all groups and individuals and do not end with unequal dichotomy expanding one at the cost of the other eroding the bedrock of the constitution.

Therefore, instead of unthoughtfully continuing and augmenting the stringencies that may disequilibrate social and economic justice, it is high time to evaluate the scenario and untwist the tangles.

An equitable recompense mechanism needs to be developed to rehabilitate any sufferer of a catastrophic event, irrespective of the issue of medical negligence (as ex gratia), judiciously utilizing public funds and abandoning the concept of retribution.

Alternatively, capping the compensation and fixing it like in public domains erasing the discrepancy between compensations in the public and private institutions, and best of all would be developing a system where a patient earns one's insurance mechanism with defined recuperation like in IRCTC, roadways, and air travels payable after a thorough civil trial (against CPA as at present) or on fixed predefined terms.

The recent statement by the Honorable Supreme Court while adjudicating applicability of the act to the advocates that the CPA was not meant for professions and that VP Shantha's judgment merits to be reviewed by a larger bench raises hopes for fair and appropriate justification towards medics as well.