BY: GEETANJALI BHARDWAJ, B.A.LL.B(HONS.), VII SEMESTER, UNIVERSITY OF ALLAHABAD
Keywords
– Relational stress
– Assisted Reproductive Techniques (ART)
– Fertility clinic malpractice
– Medical negligence
– Genetic material
– IVF lawsuits India
– Consumer protection in healthcare
– Landmark judgements
Abstract
Fertility clinic malpractice in India has become a critical legal and ethical concern, with keywords such as fertility clinic malpractice, ART negligence, IVF lawsuits, and medical negligence regularly appearing in recent headlines. Cases involving mix-ups of genetic material, unlicensed practitioners, and botched IVF procedures highlight gaps in patient safety and legal accountability. Fertility clinics, while offering hope to countless couples, have also faced lawsuits under consumer protection and criminal laws for failing in their duties of care, leading to landmark judgements and compensation pay outs. This article explores major cases, legal mechanisms, ethical challenges, and provides a comprehensive account of fertility clinic malpractice lawsuits in India.
Introduction
Infertility has a major emotional impact on couples, often leaving them on a journey filled with hope, grief, and heartbreak. The dream of becoming parents can quickly turn into an ongoing struggle, placing enormous psychological and relational stress on those involved. The ups and downs—whether from disappointing test results or exhausting treatments—can shake both partners deeply, sometimes straining even the strongest relationships.
While advances like assisted reproductive technology (ART) offer hope, many still see natural conception as a milestone. ART treatments have become critical for those facing challenges due to age, unexplained medical problems, lifestyle, or diagnosed health conditions.
Fertility treatments in India, ranging from In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF) to surrogacy arrangements, have surged in popularity. However, this growth has been accompanied by increasing reports of medical negligence, fraud, and malpractice at fertility clinics.
These lawsuits typically arise when fertility clinics or their staff fail to meet the standard of care, leading to errors such as embryo mix-ups, where patients might give birth to another couple’s child, or surrogacy scams involving illegal baby selling. The emotional and financial toll on patients is immense, given the high stakes involved in building families through such procedures.
Types of Malpractice and Examples
The research identified several common types of malpractice in fertility clinics, each with significant legal and emotional implications:
– Embryo Mix-ups and Wrongful Implantation: This occurs when clinics implant the wrong embryo, leading to patients giving birth to children not biologically related to them.
While specific Indian cases are scarce, the concept is similar to international cases, such as the 2025 US case of Krystena Murray, who sued Coastal Fertility Specialists after an embryo mix-up, reported by AP News on February 19, 2025. This highlight potential risks in Indian clinics due to lax oversight.
– Surrogacy Scams: A prominent example is the 2025 Hyderabad case, where Universal Srushti Fertility Centre was exposed for buying babies from vulnerable women and passing them off as surrogacy babies, leading to the arrest of eight individuals, as reported by The New Indian Express on July 28, 2025. The couple paid Rs 35 lakh, and the scam involved multiple cities, with over 10 cases registered.
– Negligence in Medical Procedures: This includes errors during IVF procedures, such as improper surgical techniques or medication errors. While specific fertility clinic cases are limited, general medical negligence cases like Spring Meadows Hospital and Anr. v. Harjol Ahluwalia 1 (998) [4 SCC 39] awarded INR 17,00,000 for negligence causing permanent incapacity, illustrating the potential for similar claims in fertility contexts.
– Fertility Fraud and Unauthorized Use of Genetic Material: Though less documented in India, international cases like a Colorado doctor using his own sperm (reported by Wallace Miller in 2022) similar risks, given the lack of regulation in Indian clinics.
Key Legal Framework
The legal landscape for fertility clinic malpractice lawsuits in India is complex, with variations by jurisdiction. Medical malpractice laws typically apply, but some courts treat IVF-related errors as negligence rather than malpractice, affecting the statute of limitations.
1. Consumer Protection Act, 2019
Patients aggrieved by fertility clinic negligence can file complaints before Consumer Forums. Medical services, including ART procedures, are recognized as “services” under the Consumer Protection Act, and faulty services can attract compensation.
2. Indian Penal Code (IPC)
Sections 415 (cheating), 416 (personation), and 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) have been invoked in cases where clinics commit fraudulent acts—mixing up biological materials or employing fake doctors.
3. ART and Surrogacy Laws
Though still evolving, The Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021, and Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, create more oversight, including licensing and consent protocols. Breaches can lead to both civil and criminal action.
Illustrative Examples & IPC Sections
– Illustration 1: A hospital mixes up embryos or sperm, resulting in a child unrelated to the couple—an issue falling under Section 420 (cheating) IPC and actionable under consumer protection.
– Illustration 2: A clinic employs an unqualified person or forges medical certificates, making it a case under IPC Section 416 (cheating by personation).
– Illustration 3: Denying patients information or failing to preserve embryos without consent may attract both negligence and fraud charge.
Why These Lawsuits Occur
– Inadequate record-keeping and discipline.
– Lack of stringent regulations and oversight until recently.
– Untrained or fake practitioners in fertility clinics.
– Complex nature of ART, which increases chances of error and abuse.
– Lack of transparent communication about risks and outcomes.
– Lack of staff training and quality control systems.
– Informed consent violations.
– Misdiagnosis or Improper treatment.
Case Law Analysis
- NCDRC, Bhatia Global Hospital Case (2023)
In this landmark decision, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission imposed a record-high penalty of INR 1.5 crore on a hospital for sperm mix-up during an intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) process. The commission emphasized the duty of care required in such sensitive procedures and condemned misleading advertisements and unethical practices.
- Universal Srushti Fertility Centre, Hyderabad (2024-25)
Revealing an organized surrogacy scam, authorities uncovered fabricated birth certificates and handing over of unrelated children to couples, raising both criminal liability and consumer fraud issues.
- Indira IVF Medical Negligence (2021)
A case where the hospital failed to provide adequate care in a high-risk pregnancy led to a substantial compensation order, highlighting failure in ‘duty of care’ at critical stages of ART procedures.
- Samira Kohli vs. Dr. Prabha Manchanda [(2008) CPJ 56 (SC)]
In this case victim was awarded with INR 25,000 for unauthorized surgery, highlighting informed consent issues relevant to fertility treatments.
- State of Haryana and Ors vs. Smt. Santra [I (2000) CPJ 53 (SC)]
This case addressed defective sterilization, with compensation awarded, applicable to fertility procedures.
- Spring Meadows Hospital vs. Harjol Ahluwalia [(1998) (SC)]
This case addressed the issue of negligence causing incapacity. The victim was awarded with the compensation of INR 17,00,000.
Below is a table summarizing key cases discussed: –
Recent Developments and Trends
The number of legal battles linked to fertility treatments has been on the rise in recent years. A notable case in Hyderabad recently uncovered a widespread racket operating across multiple cities, shining a harsh spotlight on the vulnerabilities within India’s fertility industry. Such incidents have not only rattled public confidence but also heightened awareness about the urgent need for tighter regulation.
These high-profile cases have sparked conversations far beyond the courtroom. Families impacted by errors or unethical practices in fertility clinics are increasingly speaking out, pushing policymakers to take notice. The demand for consistent and fair regulation is growing louder, yet the current system remains highly fragmented. According to a Telegraph India report from 2013, out of approximately 1,200 ART clinics operating across the country, only 177 were registered with the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) at the time. This lack of uniform oversight opens the door to malpractice and exploitation, especially in the absence of stringent quality checks.
On the technological front, advancements such as improved methods of cryopreservation (the process of freezing eggs, sperm, or embryos for later use) offer promising ways to enhance the safety and reliability of reproductive procedures. However, the benefits of these innovations are not felt evenly. Implementation of these technologies often varies from clinic to clinic, depending on resources, training, and awareness. This inconsistency can lead to avoidable errors, mix-ups, and in the worst cases, emotional and legal turmoil for intended parents.
Analysis and Implications
The recent surge in malpractice lawsuits involving fertility clinics reflects a larger trend in reproductive medicine—more people are turning to treatments like IVF, but the systems in place to protect them haven’t kept up. As assisted reproduction becomes more common, so do the risks, especially when oversight is patchy and standards aren’t consistent nationwide.
Cases like the one in Hyderabad have spotlighted not just the technical failings of certain clinics, but also the deep emotional pain these incidents cause. When something goes wrong in the process of building a family—whether it’s a mix-up in embryo transfers, poor storage practices, or unethical advice—the effects are far more than clinical. They hit people at their most vulnerable, leaving emotional scars that legal proceedings often fail to understand, let alone heal.
One major legal challenge is how the system classifies these errors. Are they simple instances of negligence, or do they amount to medical malpractice? This distinction is crucial because it directly impacts what kind of justice or compensation patients can pursue. Unfortunately, the laws surrounding fertility care aren’t always clear—definitions are murky, statutes of limitations may run out too soon, and victims often face an uphill battle when seeking accountability.
To truly protect patients, more needs to be done. Fertility clinics should be required to follow standardized medical protocols, undergo regular independent audits, and report outcomes transparently. A centralized, national oversight body could help by ensuring uniformity in practices across the country, reducing the chances for mistakes or intentional wrongdoing to go unchecked.
Most importantly, the legal framework must begin to recognize that reproductive errors are not just technical failures—they’re deeply personal, life-altering experiences. Legal systems should adapt to acknowledge these unique harms, offering longer windows for legal action and more tailored support for those affected. In such intimate and emotionally fraught situations, accountability must go beyond paperwork—it must involve genuine empathy and a commitment to justice.
Conclusion
Fertility clinic malpractice lawsuits in India draw attention to the pressing need for tighter regulation and ethical practices in ART and IVF clinics. Fertility clinic malpractice often arises due to inadequate compliance with the law, lack of transparency, and insufficient safeguards. Recent landmark judgements and surrogacy rackets illustrate the gravity of the problem and call for strict enforcement and routine audits. As India’s fertility clinic industry expands, ensuring accountability, transparency, and adherence to ethical and legal standards is crucial to safeguard patient interests and prevent fertility clinic malpractice.
References
– [Bhatia Global Hospital Case – NCDRC, sperm mix-up judgement (scconline.com)]
– [Universal Srushti Fertility Centre Surrogacy Scam – Times of India]
– [Indira IVF Medical Negligence – Medical Dialogues]
– [INDU v. INDIA IVF HOSPITAL | District Forum Judgement (Case Mine)]
(https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/63be59f04df38c37ca520ca7)
– [Nath A, “Woman Forces Teen Daughter to Donate Eggs to Fertility Clinic, Arrested” – India Today]
