Ans. is 'a' i.e. Res ipsa loquitor o Leaving scissors in the abdomen at the time of surgery is an example of criminal negligence in which the evidence speaks for itself and is thus covered under Res IpsaLoquitorDoctrine related with negligenceResp Ipsa Loquitar (fact speaks for itself): Generally the innocence of doctor is assumed and the patient has to establish the guilt, However, it is not required to prove negligence in a case where the doctrine of resp Ipsa loquitar applies; rather the doctor has to defend himself.Calculated risk doctrine: It is a defense to doctor. It states that 'resp Ipsa loquitar' should not be applied when the complained injury may have occurred even through proper care has been taken.The doctrine of common knowledge: Is a variant of res ipsa loquitar in which patient has to prove the negligence but he need not produce evidence to establish the standard of care (in res ipsa loquitar both are not required). It is based on assumption that the doctor will be held responsible for negligence in particular case which is within the common knowledge of medical practitioner e.g. not giving fluids in dehydrated or ATS in injuries.Diagnostic or Therapeutic misadventure: It is the occurrence of misadventure causing injury' or death of the patient due to the inherent risk of procedure or drug, e.g. adverse effects of a drug. It is unintentional.Medical maloccurance (inevitable accident or Act of God): On certain occasions, despite all proper care given by doctor during treatment, the patient may fail to respond properly or may suffer adverse reactions of the drug. It is due to biological variations in different people.Novus Actus interventions : A person is responsible for his actions and its consequences. This principle applies to cases of assault or accidental injuries. However, sometime such continuty of events is broken by an entirely new and unexpected happening, due to negligence of some other person, i.e. novus actus intervenient (an unrelated action intervening). For example. If a person has been assaulted due to which he has sustained large liver laceration, for which he is operated by a surgeon. If the patient dies intraoperative ly or postopratively due to complications related to surgery or injury, the person who has assaulted the patient will be held responsible. But, if the doctor has done some negligent act during surgery', e.g. left the swab or instrument in abdomen during surgery-; and patient dies because of that act (sepsis due to swab), then the response may pass from original incident to later negligent act of doctor by principle of 'novus actus intervention' (an unrelated action intervening). This doctor is responsible for the negligent act, i.e. criminal negligence(PGI 93,AP and the assailant will not be fully responsible for the ultimate harm.Contributory' negligence : It is defined as concurrent or simultaneous negligence of doctor and patient so as to lead to damage to the patient. Normally it is only a partial defence and court has right to fix liabilities between doctor and patient (doctrine of comparative negligence) and damages awarded may be reduced accordingly. Contributory' negligence can be used as defence by the doctor, but in civil cases only. It cannot be used as defence in followingCriminal negligenceLast clear chance doctrine ; i.e. if doctor has discovered it before causing injury' and failed to avoid that,Avoidable consequences rule ; i.e. due to negligence of doctor, there occurs damage to patient, but due to later damage of patient, damage becomes more.Good samartion doctrine : One who assisted another in serious need cannot be charged for contributory' negligence, provided that the assistance is not rash and reckless.Vicarious responsibility (Liability): It means master is liable for negligent acts of his serv ants, even inspite of absence of blame-worthy conduct on his part. Thus hospital and senior medical staff are responsible for negligent act of junior medical staff (interns and resident doctors). This responsibility is there because of master servant relationship, i.e. the senior can dictate the line of treatment to be followed. However, hospital is not responsible for senior medical staff as master servent relationship does not exist. The vicarious responsibility is there only in civil negligence cases and not in criminal cases.Borrow ed servant doctrine (captain of the ship doctrine): The private practitioner, who is not a staff of a private hospital, will be held responsible for all the negligent acts by any of the hospital staff on the patient admitted by him. The hospital will not be held here liable, because all the instructions for the patient admitted is carried on by hospital staff as told by private practitioner (i.e. he is the captain of the ship).Product liability : Manufacturer is liable for quality of drug and medical equipment.