Ahmedabad: A man who lost his nine-year-old dog, Myson, to cancer two years ago is fighting against a city veterinarian, alleging medical negligence and mistreatment that he claims hastened the pet’s death. The owner’s fight for answers and accountability got tougher when he approached the Gujarat Veterinary Council (GVC), which allegedly denied him a hearing. The owner alleged institutional bias and took the matter to Veterinary Council of India claiming that the veterinarian was confident that GVC would not act against him.The central body has sent the matter back to the state council for a fresh hearing.Myson had been under the veterinarian’s treatment since Feb 2022 for health issues. His owner alleged that despite being aware of the dog’s condition, the veterinarian prescribed inappropriate treatment and failed to adequately communicate the results of diagnostic tests, including x-rays and sonography.When the dog’s condition failed to improve, the owner sought a second opinion in Oct 2024. It was then, he claimed, that Myson was diagnosed with B-cell lymphoma, a form of cancer that generally requires early detection and treatment. The dog died later that month.In his complaint before GVC, he accused the veterinarian of medical negligence and sought proceedings under the Indian Veterinary Council Act. He also alleged deficiency in service, cruelty towards animals by failing to provide proper treatment, and even invoked provisions relating to the alleged wrongful death of his pet and financial exploitation through unnecessary treatment.The veterinarian denied the allegations, contending that the owner himself discontinued the prescribed medicines without consultation and failed to bring the dog for follow-up treatment for an extended period. According to the defence, the pet owner did not visit the clinic again until Sept 2024 and did not adhere to medical advice, contributing to the animal’s deteriorating condition.A three-member committee constituted by GVC examined the owner’s complaint and the veterinarian’s response. In its verdict dated Sep 19, 2025, the committee concluded that it is of the view that the veterinarian has “performed all medical tests required and informed the pet parent about the possible prognosis. Pet parent has not followed the instructions about the medications to be followed at home and has taken decision on his own without proper knowledge of having side effects of not following the instructions given by doctor”. The panel stated that it did not think that any of the allegations can prove the negligence by the veterinarian for the line of treatment.Unhappy with the findings, the owner approached VCI, alleging that the proceedings before the GVC were conducted ex parte and that he was never granted a hearing. Alleging institutional bias, he further claimed that the veterinarian had earlier told him that the council would not act against him.The central council subsequently remanded the matter to GVC for a fresh hearing. During the latest hearing on Monday, the pet parent urged the council to permit legal representation and allow him to place additional evidence on record in support of his allegations. ————————————————-
