London: General Medical Council, 1999: 2. Other fields face a more stringent analysis by judges in an effort to guarantee that expert testimony is reasonable under the circumstances. An obligation to give a patient all the information available to the doctor would often be inconsistent with the doctor’s contractual obligation to have regard to the patient’s best interests. Due to its ubiquitous domain, challenging medical acumen could subvert our general vista and call into question certain features of our everyday lives that are contingent upon it. In such circumstances, medical law is of the opinion that Bolam test states that if a doctor reaches the standards of a responsible body of medical opinion, then he is not negligent. was unable to sue Stevenson for breach of contract it was concluded that balance of probabilities (civil law) or beyond reasonable doubt (criminal Hence, it seemed that Donaldson MR’s declaration at the Court of Appeal stage that ‘the law will not allow the medical profession to play God’  , would be ignored once again and the Bolam test would be perpetuated. It was the contention of the plaintiff that the hospital had been negligent in not giving him any relaxant drugs or restraining him during the treatment. Ultimately, it was on this divergence of opinion that the defendant doctor was able to successfully refute the negligence claims. However contrary to In cases like Anuradha Saha’s case, Supreme Court made certain directions that. In the case of Sidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital and the Maudsley Hospital Lord Diplock , Lord Templeman and Lord Scarman all affirmed the application of the Bolam principle. Bolam, prima facie, fails to attach the appropriate weight to patient rights with importance fastened, instead, to the role of the doctor. The judge proclaimed, that the negligence test in the province of medicine mandated for a standard of ‘the ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill’  . Awareness among public in the area of medical negligence in India is growing at a rapid pace. This sector in medical law recognises the importance of autonomy over paternalism; however, this area can potentially become troublesome once an element of late pregnancies is adjoined  . In this case the doctors had commented to the patient that risks were ‘not uncommon’, but they did not express to the patient the number of occasions were complications had occurred. elements required to prove negligence, there is the case of “Res Ipsa loquitur”, this is the principle that incidents It will assess the validity of the assertion that the Bolam test unfairly favours doctors at the expense patients who bring claims in clinical negligence against them, and will investigate the effect of the ruling in the Bolitho case upon that perceived imbalance.