Justice Surya Kant, Justice N. Kotiswar Singh, Supreme Court
Provision Of Medical Facilities To One And All Is Fundamental Right: Supreme Court Directs States To Consider Issue Of Exploitation By Private Hospitals
|The Writ Petition was filed before the Supreme Court with a plea to restrain the private hospitals from compelling the patients to purchase medicines/consumables from the hospital pharmacies at exorbitant rates.
The Supreme Court has asked the State Governments to frame policy in order to safeguard the patients or their attendants from unreasonable charges of medicines/ devices/ implants/ consumables sold at private hospital pharmacies.
The Writ Petition, under Article 32 of the Constitution, had been filed in public interest with a plea to restrain private hospitals from compelling the patients to purchase medicines/devices/implants/consumables from the hospital pharmacies only, where they allegedly charge exorbitant rates, as compared to the notified market prices of those items.
Highlighting that it is necessary to sensitize the State Governments regarding the problem of unreasonable charges and exploitation of patients in private hospitals, the Division Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh ordered, “Consequently, we dispose of this Writ Petition with a direction to all the State Governments to consider this issue and take appropriate policy decisions as they may deem fit.”
Factual Background
The mother of the first petitioner, who was the wife of the second petitioner, was diagnosed with breast cancer in July 2017. She underwent surgery, followed by six chemotherapies, 20 sessions of radiotherapy, and 17 adjuvant chemotherapies. This treatment continued when the instant petition was filed in 2018. During the hearing, the Court was informed that the patient recovered. The petitioners claimed to have realized during her treatment that there is an organized system adopted by the private hospitals, nursing homes, health care institutions, etc. to fleece patients by compelling them and their attendants to buy medicines only from the pharmacies run by such hospitals or with whom they have some form of collaboration.
It was claimed that the medicines/treatments etc. are sold by these pharmacies at highly inflated artificial prices, as compared to the MRP notified by the Competent Authority. Moreover, it was the case of the petitioners that in the absence of any price controlling or monitoring of the consumables which do not fall within the definition of “drugs”, under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, the private hospitals, nursing homes, etc. take undue advantage of the fact that the patients or their attendants do not have many options but to purchase the items/medicines at inflated prices.
On such grounds, the Petitioner sought a direction to the private hospitals not to compel the patients to buy the medicines, etc. from the pharmacies recommended by them. They further sought a direction that the Union of India or the State Governments should formulate a policy to prevent this form of exploitation.
Reasoning
The Bench asserted, “There can be no doubt that the provision of medical facilities to one and all is an essential component of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The States have, therefore, committed themselves to provide medical facilities to the people in furtherance of the duty and vision enshrined in Part IV of the Constitution.”
It was further noticed that due to the proportion of the population of this country, the States have not been able to develop the requisite medical infrastructure to cater to the needs of all kinds of patients and have, therefore, facilitated and promoted private entities to come forward in the medical field. “It, therefore, must be acknowledged that not only the people, even the States look towards these private entities to provide basic and specialized medical facilities to the public at large”, the Bench said.
Some of the issues that came before the Bench were whether it would be prudent for the Union of India or the States to introduce a policy which regulates each and every activity within the compound of these private hospitals and whether such a policy would discourage persons to come forward and invest in the health industry throughout the country. The Bench further explained that the subject of public health and sanitation, hospitals, and dispensaries falls under List-II – the State List – and, therefore, any such measure, must be taken by the State Governments, keeping their local conditions in mind.
“To sum up, it may not be advisable for this Court to issue mandatory directions which may hamper the growth of hospitals in the private sector; but parallelly, it is necessary to sensitize the State Governments re: the problem of unreasonable charges and exploitation of patients in private hospitals”, it added.
The Bench thus disposed of the Writ Petition with a direction to all the State Governments to consider this issue and take appropriate policy decisions.
Cause Title: Siddharth Dalmia & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 351)