Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: Prathiba M. Singh, J., decided over a writ petition which was filed through the son of the Petitioner, who was an 83-year old senior citizen, in the hospital run by the Respondent 2. i.e., Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences (“IHBAS”), on 29-04-2021 due to an emergency medical condition suggesting a neurological ailment.

The petitioner had suffered a brain stroke on 29-04-2021 and was admitted to IHBAS, thereafter he was detected with fever and upon conducting an RT-PCR test, he turned out to be positive for COVID-19. The petitioner in the petition stated that IHBAS, was not a designated COVID-19 hospital thus his attendant was asked to shift the petitioner into a COVID-19 hospital. The petitioner prayed that a direction be issued to Respondent- hospital to treat the patient there itself, and not discharge him, as it would jeopardize his life and chances of survival.

Mr Gautam Narayan, ASC appearing for the GNCTD, submitted that a bed could be made available to the Petitioner, in Lok Narayan Jai Prakash Hospital (“LNJP”), which was also a COVID hospital and also had the facilities even to take care of the Neurological/Cardiac issues of the Petitioner. Mr Tushar Sannu, counsel appearing for IHBAS submitted that the hospital was not treating this case in an adversarial manner, and the patient was currently stable with 5 MTs oxygen. He had been kept in a transit COVID facility, where three COVID patients were currently admitted.

Counsel for the petitioner Mr Kamlesh Kumar submitted that the petitioner as well as the son of the petitioner both had expressed a deep sense of apprehension in shifting the patient from IHBAS to LNJP Hospital, on the ground that the main problem which the Petitioner is facing is a neurological issue, which can be taken care of at IHBAS in a proper manner further, the patient was not comfortable in being moved to a general hospital, and he was satisfied with the treatment he was receiving at IHBAS.

The Court observed that the risks associated with the doctors and arrangements at IHBAS, it being a non- COVID facility, have been appraised of to the counsel and son of the Petitioner, however, despite the choice being available to move to LNJP Hospital, both the counsel and the son of the Petitioner have opted to let the Petitioner remain in IHBAS and view of the above considering the fact that medical acceptability for the Petitioner to move to LNJP hospital was not there, it is directed that the Petitioner- patient, would continue to remain at IHBAS. The Court however made clear that t IHBAS would not be held liable in any manner, inasmuch as the Petitioner and his family were conscious of the fact that the doctors at IHBAS may not have the same specialization required for a COVID patient – it not being a COVID-19 designated hospital and also due to the fact that it is on the Petitioner’s insistence that he is not being moved to a COVID facility.

The Court further considering the acute shortage and severe demand for beds pertaining to COVID-19 patients and COVID-19 related facilities in the city of Delhi, the Principal Secretary, Ministry of Health, GNCTD, shall process the proposal from IHBAS as it had been revealed that IHBAS had a total capacity of over 200 beds, and at this point of time, approximately only about 50 beds were occupied. IHBAS was stated to have already moved a proposal to the GNCTD, to make available about 60 to 80 beds, and convert the same into a COVID facility.

[Brijpal Singh v. Govt of NCT Delhi, 2021 SCC OnLine Del 1998, decided on 07-05-2021]


Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has put this report together 

COVID 19Hot Off The PressNews

The Supreme Court has notified that only urgent matters will be listed for hearing w.e.f. 22.04.2021.

The Circular, further, states that

  • the Advocate-on-Record/Party-in-Person may send signed and verified mentioning-application along with synopsis containing the grounds of urgency not exceeding one page in the fresh matter only by e-mail at the email address mention.sc@sci.nic.in on working days by 1.00 PM (Monday to Friday) and by 11.30 AM (Saturday) and the same shall be processed for listing on the next to next working day, subject to availability of the concerned Bench and approval of the Competent Authority. The mentioning applications received thereafter shall be processed for listing on the working day after the next to next working day. and
  • the Advocate-on-Record/Party-in-Person may send signed and verified mentioning-application along with synopsis containing the grounds of urgency not exceeding one page in the IA (Interlocutory Application) in pending matter and Miscellaneous Application (MA) in disposed of matter only by e-mail at the email address mention.an.sc@sci.nic.in on working days by 1.00 PM (Monday to Friday) and by 11.30 AM (Saturday) and the same shall be processed for listing on the next to next working day, subject to availability of the concerned Bench and approval of the Competent Authority. The mentioning applications received thereafter shall be processed for listing on the working day after the next to next working day, subject to availability of the concerned Bench and approval of the Competent Authority.

Here are the matters that are treated as “urgent” as per circular Number F.No. 9/Judl.(I)/2019 dated 23rd January, 2019

  1. Matters in which death penalty has been awarded;
  2. Petition for habeas corpus and matters relating to it
  3. Matters relating to imminent apprehension of demolition of property:
  4. Matters relating to dispossession/eviction;
  5. Matters for anticipatory bail and matters filed against orders refusing/granting bail;
  6. Matters relating to Admission in Educational Institutions -where schedule for admission in any educational institution is going to close and session is yet to start
  7. Matters relating to Contempt of Court where specific date has been fixed by the High Court for reporting compliance
  8. Election matters where the notification has already been issued and the last date fixed for filing of nomination/withdrawal/election is going to expire;
  9. Matters relating to leases, govt. contracts and contracts by local bodies matters in which date of auction/bidding of tender has been fixed;
  10. Transfer Petitions – seeking transfer of matters which are fixed for final hearing or for personal appearance;
  11. Matters in which date of auction or sealing of the premises is fixed or action for attachment of accounts or encashment of Bank (Guarantee has been initiated.
  12. Matters pertaining to custody of child;
  13. Matters pertaining to medical termination of pregnancy;
  14. LAs filed in above mentioned categories of matters; and
  15. Any other matter which, in. the opinion of concerned Registrar, requires listed mentioning.

Case BriefsCOVID 19High Courts

Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ravindra Maithani, JJ., directed the State Government to file a report regarding COVID-19 virus testing facilities and regarding proper establishment of quarantine centres.

The reports were filed in the Court with regard to the quarantine centers at village level which were pathetic in Court’s opinion.

The reason for the pathetic condition was that the Gram Pradhans had absolutely no fund to run these quarantine centers. 

Secretary, Health Government of Uttarakhand was in view of the above directed to file a detailed report about the conditions of quarantine centers and whether appropriate funds have been received by them.

Yet, no affidavit has been filed before the Court as to why the Government has failed to run these basic level quarantine centers in the State.

Testing for Corona Virus

For the stated, Court was informed that the number of tests which are being done in the State at various districts are extremely low considering the number of positive cases which have come up in Uttarakhand and also as compared to the average national standard.

Bench on consideration of the facts and circumstances stated that,

“These are strange and difficult times.”

Court is conscious of the challenges before the Government, which are immense in this crisis. Yet all that was asked was for a report.

Court has been assured by the Advocate general for the State  that it would bring on record regarding the testing facility and as regarding the proper establishment of quarantine centers in the State by 22-06-2020.

Court thus made it clear that a report needs to be filed by the Secretary, Health, Government of Uttarakhand.

Matter to be listed on 23-06-2020.[Sachdanand Dabral v. UOI, 2020 SCC OnLine Utt 278 , decided on 17-06-2020]