Medical Negligence cases - degree of proof  is higher : SC                   

                         "............To hold a medical practitioner liable for negligence, a higher threshold limit must be met. This is to ensure that these doctors are focused on deciding the best course of treatment as per their assessment rather than being concerned about possible persecution or harassment that they may be subjected to in high-risk medical situations. Therefore, to safeguard these medical practitioners and to ensure that they are able to freely discharge their medical duty, a higher proof of burden must be fulfilled by the complainant. The complainant should be able to prove a breach of duty and the subsequent injury being attributable to the aforesaid breach as well, in order to hold a doctor liable for medical negligence. On the other hand, doctors need to establish that they had followed reasonable standards of medical practice.

                        Just because a doctor opts for a particular line of treatment but does not achieve the desired result, they cannot be held liable for negligence, provided that the said course of action undertaken was recognised as sound and relevant medical practice. This may include a procedure entailing a higher risk element as well, which was opted for after due consideration and deliberation by the doctor. Therefore, a line of treatment undertaken should not be of a discarded or obsolete category in any circumstance."

                                [ M.A. Biviji v. Sunita  (2024) 2 SCC 242  para 39 ]