Summary
In continuing pandemic proceedings, the Court directed correction of Delhi’s oxygen deficit, creation of additional emergency oxygen buffers and a national hospital-admission policy. Pending that policy, lack of local residence or identity documents could not justify denial of hospitalisation or essential drugs. It prohibited coercion against people seeking help or airing grievances online, sought responses on vaccination and drug supplies, and distinguished binding directions from policy suggestions and provisional concerns.
Issues
- What national measures were required to secure oxygen, hospital admission and essential treatment during the pandemic.
- Whether vaccination procurement, pricing and digital access required reconsideration under Articles 14 and 21.
- Whether authorities could threaten action against people seeking pandemic assistance or expressing grievances.
Provisions considered
- Articles 14, 21, 32 and 226, Constitution of IndiaExercised national fundamental-rights jurisdiction without displacing High Court jurisdiction; raised provisional equality and life concerns about access to vaccination and treatment. (¶¶ 2, 5, 36-39)
- Sections 11 and 12, Disaster Management Act, 2005Explained the national planning framework; existing plans could be supplemented with pandemic guidelines, while ex gratia assistance was suggested for consideration. (¶ 7-14)
- Paragraphs 19 and 20, Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 2013Identified exceptional price-control and monitoring powers while recommending examination of measures against unaffordable essential drugs. (¶ 51-55)
Held
- The Court addressed national and inter-State issues through Article 32 while preserving High Courts’ Article 226 jurisdiction. Its engagement sought explanations and protection of rights without assuming executive policy functions. Unless stated otherwise, observations and directions concerned the Union because States had not yet been heard. (¶¶ 2, 4-5, 22)
- Following the Union’s assurance, Delhi’s oxygen deficit had to be rectified by midnight on 3 May 2021 through cooperation with its government. The Union and States had to create decentralised emergency oxygen buffers within four days, replenish them daily and keep them additional to ordinary allocations. (¶¶ 29-30, 69(i)-(ii))
- The Union had to frame a national hospital-admission policy within two weeks. Pending that policy, no State or Union Territory could deny hospitalisation or essential drugs for lack of local residence or any identity proof. Interim admission guidance required State and Union Territory circulars within three days. (¶¶ 23, 69(iv))
- Authorities could not threaten prosecution or arrest against people seeking help, helping others or airing pandemic grievances on social media or other platforms. Police leadership had to communicate compliance throughout the force; attempts to suppress such voices could attract the Court’s coercive jurisdiction. (¶¶ 61, 69(iii))
- The Court provisionally questioned decentralised vaccine procurement, differential pricing and digital exclusion, requiring reconsideration and a response rather than finally invalidating the policy or fixing vaccine prices. Statutory patent options, drug-price interventions and several workforce measures were discussed as executive options or recommendations. (¶¶ 36-46, 51-59, 66-67, 69(v))
- The Union had to respond on oxygen, vaccines, pricing, drugs and other issues before the next hearing and supply advance copies to the amici. Governments were urged to consider restrictions on mass gatherings and lockdowns with prior provision for vulnerable people; no nationwide lockdown was ordered. Government data recorded in the order were expressly not accepted or endorsed as findings. (¶ 68-69)
Result
Proceedings continued to 10 May 2021 with binding oxygen, hospital-admission and protection-against-coercion directions, and further responses required from the Union; policy observations and suggestions were subject to the qualifications in the order.