The court emphasized that medical treatment protocols should remain within the jurisdiction of healthcare experts rather than being subject to judicial interference, especially concerning the management of public health crises.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ petition seeking mandamus to modify treatment protocols for Covid-19 - Court declines to intervene, emphasizing the complexity of medical protocols and the expertise of health authorities - Reiterates that court lacks the necessary medical expertise to direct treatment protocols. (Paras 2-5)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners sought direction for the government to consider their representations and modify Covid-19 treatment protocols based on their research findings. The petition was argued on the grounds of a need for evidence-based treatments, inclusive of a call to reduce reliance on antibiotics and steroids.

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that it lacks the requisite competence to dictate treatment protocols to health authorities and that the protocol must be left to the discretion of qualified experts.

Issues: Whether a court can direct modifications to Covid-19 treatment protocols based on external research suggestions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that handling of pandemic treatment protocols falls within the purview of medical experts, and the court should not replace established practices without thorough knowledge.

Result: Writ petition dismissed with costs of Rs.25,000/-.

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

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 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 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 th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document