Jacob Puliyel vs Union of India - 2022 Supreme(SC) 396

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(SC) 396

L. NAGESWARA RAO, B. R. GAVAI
Jacob Puliyel – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):Prashant Bhushan, Cheryl D’Souza, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Aishwarya Bhati, Ld. ASG Ketan Paul, Aman Mohiyal, Shivika Mehra, Ameyavikrama Thanvi, Rajat Nair, Kanu Aggarwal, Mayank Pandey, Gurmeet Singh Makker, S.Guru Krishnakumar, Vipin Nair, P.B. Suresh, Sughosh Subramanyam, Arindam Ghosh, Agnish Aditya, Karthik Jayshankar, Prakash Baghel, Malvika Kapila, Shyel Trehan, Hitesh Jain, Malvika Kapila, Monisha Mane Bhangale, Warisha Parkar, Bhagya Yadav, Tanwangi Shukla, Mrinal Gopal Elker, Rahul Chintis, Sachin Patil, Aaditya A. Pande, Geo Joseph, Jyoti Mendiratta, Amit Anand Tiwari, Joseph Aristotle S., Mary Mitzy, Devyani Gupta, Tanvi Anand, Nupur Sharma, Shobhit Dwivedi, Sanjeev Kumar Mahara, Shailesh Madiyal, Meenakshi S. Kamble, Hitesh Kumar Sharma, S.K. Rajora, Akhileshwar Jha, Kavita S. More, Amit Kumar, Ajay Bansal, Gaurav Yadava veena Bansal, Advocates

Table of Content
1. petitioner's request for vaccine data transparency (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments regarding vaccine safety and mandates (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. maintainability of writ petition concerning public interest (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. judicial scrutiny of executive decisions on vaccine mandates (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
5. arguments relating to individual rights and public health (Para 26 , 27 , 30)
6. need for transparency in clinical trial data of vaccines (Para 56 , 57 , 58 , 64)
7. impact of vaccine mandates on individual autonomy (Para 59 , 62 , 63)
8. court’s concluding remarks and disposition of writ (Para 89 , 90 , 91)

JUDGMENT :

L. Nageswara Rao, J.

1. The Petitioner was a member of the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (NTAGI) and was advising the Government of India on vaccines. He has filed this Writ Petition in public interest seeking the following reliefs:

“(a) Direct the respondents to release the entire segregated trial data for each of the phases of trials that have been undertaken with respect to the vaccines being administered in India; and

(b) Direct the respondent No 2 to disclose the detailed minutes of the meetings of the Subject Expert Committee and the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(SC) 396

L. NAGESWARA RAO, B. R. GAVAIJacob Puliyel – AppellantVersusUnion of India – Respondent

L. NAGESWARA RAO, B. R. GAVAI
Jacob Puliyel – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent