Delhi High Court
Vivek Sheel Aggarwal & Ors. vs Union Of India & Ors. on 25 May, 2021
$~41
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 25th May, 2021
+ W.P.(C) 5510/2021
VIVEK SHEEL AGGARWAL & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Sacchin Puri, Sr. Adv. with
Mr.Dhananjay Grover, Adv.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with
Mr.Kirtiman Singh, CGSC with Mr.Vinay Yadav,
Mr. Akshay Gadeock, Mr.Amit Gupta, Mr.Sahaj
Garg, Mr.Waize Ali Noor & Mr. Taha Yasin,
Advs. for UOI/R-1 & R-3
Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr. Abhigyan
Siddhant & Mr. Nitnem Singh Ghuman, Advs.
for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH
JUDGMENT
D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE(ORAL)
Proceedings have been conducted through video conferencing.
CM APPL.17078/2021 (exemptions from filing court fee/attested affidavit)
For the reasons stated in the application and in view of the present
prevailing situation, the present application is allowed. However, the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:AMIT
NARAYAN BHARTHUAR
Signing Date:28.05.2021
14:37:11
Applicant is directed to file duly signed and affirmed affidavits within a
period of one week and the requisite Court fee within a period of 72 hours
from the date of resumption of regular functioning of the Court.
The application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.5510/2021
1. This writ petition has been preferred with the following prayers:
"a) Issue a writ of mandamus to the Respondents directing the
Respondents to consider and respond to the representations of
the Petitioners dated 29.04.2021, 04.05.2021, 07.05.2021 and
08.05.2021 and to hold a double blind human clinical trial on the
"Safety and efficacy of the use of antipyretics in COVID-19
Moralities" forthwith and further to modify the Treatment
Protocol of Covid -19 patients across the country especially the
management of Mild Cases in the light of the hypothesis of the
Petitioners , if the course suggested by the Petitioners, are found
in order;
b) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to lay
down protocols against use of antibiotics and steroids in the
treatment of mild cases of Covid-19;
c) Pass any other or further order as may be deemed fit in the
facts and circumstances of the present case."
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and looking to
the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no reason to entertain this
writ petition.
3. Much has been argued by the learned senior counsel appearing for the
Petitioners regarding the need to modify the treatment protocol of Covid-19
patients across the country, especially the management of mild cases in the
light of hypothesis of the Petitioners. It is argued that the suggested protocol
of treatment by the Petitioners was brought to the notice of the Ministry of
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:AMIT
NARAYAN BHARTHUAR
Signing Date:28.05.2021
14:37:11
Health and Family Welfare by representation dated 29.04.2021 followed by
reminders. The suggested regime of treatment by the Petitioners which aims
at reducing use of antibiotics and antipyretics is supported by International
Research Papers and opinion of Experts globally as well as Virologist and
Doctors from across the world. Learned senior counsel places reliance on
some Research Papers and medical literature placed on record and annexed
to the writ petition. The treatment protocol adopted in California for Covid-
19 patients including the dosage is also highlighted through a Research
Paper.
4. While the object of the Petitioners may be laudable but we cannot lose
sight of the fact that treatment protocol for Covid-19 patients in India has
been devised by the experts in the field, after discussions, suggestions, trials
and based on sound medical knowledge in this field and the Court cannot
readily accept the ipse dixit of the Petitioners based on some Research
Papers. Treatment protocol of Covid-19 patients in India which includes
administering medicines, injections etc. is a complex procedure and Court is
not equipped with the necessary expertise or medical knowhow to even
direct the Government to substitute one protocol with another. Respondents
have experts/multi-member committees for deciding the treatment protocol
for Covid-19 patients in India and a team of experts is taking decisions
based on verified data and trials. This cannot be altered or even interfered
with by this Court.
5. While exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, if this Court were to entertain petitions of this nature, there would be a
floodgate of petitions where every petitioner would seek the relief of
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:AMIT
NARAYAN BHARTHUAR
Signing Date:28.05.2021
14:37:11
directing the Government to abide by his or her suggestions on a certain
protocol and line of treatment. It is not for the Court to render advice much
less issue directions to the Government on the line of treatment that is
required to be followed, as we are sanguine that the Departments concerned
have the assistance of able and competent Doctors, Scientists and
Researchers in the field, to assist in devising or improving the protocols.
6. Learned senior counsel, at this stage, seeks a direction to the
Respondents to dispose of the representations pending before them and look
into the suggestions given. We see no reason to give any such direction to
the Respondents to decide the representations of the Petitioners for
modification/change of the treatment protocol. It is a matter of common
knowledge that the officials in various Departments concerned with the
Pandemic are already overburdened in handling the crisis of the Pandemic
and they ought to be left to handle patients, their treatment and connected
issues, rather than deciding representations of the Petitioners. In fact
Respondents No. 2 and 3 are at present handling an additional crisis on
account of a newly emerging infection i.e. Mucormycosis and have their
hands full.
7. In view of the above, we see no reason to entertain this Public Interest
Litigation, which is more in the nature of publicity interest litigation.
8. We, therefore, dismiss this writ petition with costs of Rs. 25,000/-
(Rupees twenty five thousand only) to be paid by the Petitioners to the Delhi
State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) within four weeks from today.
The aforesaid amount shall be utilized for the programme 'Access to
Justice'.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:AMIT
NARAYAN BHARTHUAR
Signing Date:28.05.2021
14:37:11
9. A copy of this order be sent to the Member Secretary, Delhi State
Legal Services Authority, Central Office, Patiala House Courts Complex,
New Delhi - 110001.
CHIEF JUSTICE
JYOTI SINGH, J
MAY 25, 2021
ns
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:AMIT
NARAYAN BHARTHUAR
Signing Date:28.05.2021
14:37:11
