IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the necessity for independent decision-making by authorities in organ donation cases, mandating clear reasoning for rejections to uphold the right to life and health.

JUDGMENT :

The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P11 order passed by the 2nd respondent.

2. The 1^st petitioner is suffering from chronic liver disease. She has been advised to undergo transplantation. The 3^rd petitioner is the husband of the 1^st petitioner. As there is no suitable relative in the 1^st petitioner's family to donate a part of the liver, the 2^nd petitioner has volunteered to donate a part of his liver. Consequently, the petitioners submitted a joint application along with the requisite documents before the 2^nd respondent seeking permission for the donation. By Ext.P8 order, the 2^nd respondent has withheld the joint application of the petitioners 1 and 2 for the certificate of altruism from the District Police Chief. The action of the 2^nd respondent is arbitrary. Hence, the writ petition.

3. When the writ petition came up for consideration on 14.3.2025, the learned Government Pleader submitted that the 2^nd respondent had kept the petitioners' application on the hold awaiting the certificate of altruism from the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Guruvayoor. The 2^nd respondent would take a decision on the joint application immediately on receipt of the certificate of altruism. Accordingly, the writ petition was adjourned to today.

4. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioners' and the learned Government Pleader.

5. Today when the writ petition was taken up for consideration, the learned Government Pleader handed over the order dated 26.3.2025 passed by the 2^nd respondent rejecting the petitioners' application for permission. The said order is suo motu accepted on record and marked as Ext.P11 in the writ petition.

6. On a reading of the said order, I find that the 2^nd respondent has rejected the application solely for the reason that the police report does not categorically rule out financial transaction. Therefore, the 2^nd respondent found it is inappropriate to approve the transplantation as per the provisions of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014 ('the Rules').

7. The Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 (Act No.42 of 1994) ('Act', in short), is enacted to regulate the removal, storage and transplantation of human organs and tissues for therapeutic purposes and for the prevention of commercial dealings in human organs and tissues and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

8. The Act permits and regulates organ and tissue transplantations among near-relatives and non- near-relatives as per the provisions of the Act, 1994, and the Rules made thereunder.

9. S.2(i) defines "near relatives" as spouse, son, daughter, father, mother, brother, sister, grandfather, grandmother, grandson or granddaughter.

10. The above provision permits the donation of human organs and tissues in favour of a person who is not a near relative but with the prior approval of the Authorisation Committee.

11. To achieve the object of the Act, sub-rule (3) of Rule 7 and Rule 19 of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014 ('the Rules') have been incorporated in the Rules, which reads as under:

"R.7 Authorisation Committee. –

*** ***

***

(3) When the proposed donor and the recipient are not near relatives, the Authorisation Committee shall, ―

(i) evaluate that there is no commercial transaction between the recipient and the donor and that no payment has been made to the donor or promised to be made to the donor or any other person;

(ii) prepare an explanation of the link between them and the circumstances which led to the offer being made;

(iii) examine the reasons why the donor wishes to donate;

(iv) examine the documentary evidence of the link, e.g. proof that they have lived together, etc.;

(v) examine old photographs showing the donor and the recipient together;

(vi) evaluate that there is no middleman or tout involved;

(vii) evaluate that financial status of the donor and the recipient by asking them to give appropriate evidence of their vocation and income for the previous three fina