The Calcutta High Court has awarded ₹5 lakh compensation to a patient who suffered serious loss of eyesight following cataract surgery at a government hospital in West Bengal. The Division Bench held that the State could not avoid liability where deficiencies in hospital infrastructure, sterilisation and supervision were linked to the patient’s condition.
Background Of The Case
The appellant had undergone cataract surgery at Gardenreach State General Hospital/Metiabruz Super-Speciality Hospital. Following the procedure, he developed complications and required further treatment, including treatment at the Regional Institute of Ophthalmology (RIO), Kolkata.
The court noted that the appellant was an electrician, self-employed and the sole earning member of his family. Records showed that he subsequently suffered loss of vision which left him partially blind. The court also noted that several other patients who underwent surgery at the hospital faced similar visual complications.
A report from the Director of RIO indicated that the incident may have resulted from contamination of microorganisms in operative devices or fluids, and/or faulty sterilisation of instruments.
Court's Observation
The Bench comprising Justice Shampa Sarkar and Justice Arjun Ray Mukherjee found serious shortcomings in the hospital’s operating theatre.
The medical board had recommended changes to the operating theatre, trained nursing and attendant staff, regular sterilisation and autoclaving, and other safety measures. Yet, the same board had concluded that there was no medical negligence.
The court rejected that conclusion, observing:
“The liability of the state cannot be avoided.”
The Bench further recorded that 44 people had undergone treatment at the hospital and 22 suffered visual impairment, while questioning why surgeries were conducted despite the identified infrastructure and staffing deficiencies.
The High Court held that the right to eyesight forms part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. It said the State has a duty to maintain basic infrastructure in government hospitals and can be held responsible when fundamental rights are affected because of failures in public healthcare.
Relying on Supreme Court decisions including D.K. Basu, Nilabati Behera, Achutrao Haribhau Khodwa and Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity, the Bench held that constitutional courts can grant monetary compensation as a public-law remedy in appropriate cases.
Decision
The appeal was allowed. The High Court set aside the earlier direction requiring the appellant to approach another forum for compensation.
The State was directed to pay ₹5 lakh to the appellant within eight weeks. If the amount was not paid within that period, it would carry simple interest at 6% per annum from the date of the order until payment.
The court said the compensation was assessed after considering the treatment expenses, loss of future prospects and the fact that the appellant was the sole bread-earner of his family.
Case Details
Case Title: Gobinda Chandra Debnath v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Case Number: F.M.A. 1457 of 2025
Judge: Justice Shampa Sarkar and Justice Arjun Ray Mukherjee
Decision Date: September 2, 2026
