The Supreme Court of India stepped in on an urgent evening mention to stop a Delhi private hospital from discharging an acid attack survivor suffering from damage to both her eyes, directing Sir Ganga Ram Hospital to continue her treatment "irrespective of the cost to be incurred."

A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana passed the order when the matter was mentioned around 4 PM by a woman appearing in person on behalf of the survivor. The woman told the Court that the survivor was currently admitted at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital but was being threatened with discharge, with the hospital claiming that it was not "specialized" in the treatment required.

The woman further claimed that Apollo Hospital had also been consulted but declined to take in the survivor. She submitted that the survivor did not wish to go to a government hospital, and highlighted that the Supreme Court, through its earlier orders, has given acid attack survivors the right to avail treatment in any private hospital of their choice .

"Ganga Ram mei hai, toh wahin rakhte hain (if she is in Ganga Ram, then let her be there only)," the Chief Justice responded. The woman agreed, while submitting that if at all the survivor is to be transferred out of Ganga Ram hospital, she should be allowed treatment in Apollo Hospital .

Hospital Directed to Continue Inpatient Care Without Cost Concerns

The Court's direction placed the immediate obligation squarely on the hospital management. Sir Ganga Ram Hospital was told to take in the survivor as an indoor patient and provide all facilities, including medicines and plastic surgery, as and when required, irrespective of the cost to be incurred on the treatment.

On the allegation that the hospital was forcing the survivor to leave, the Court added that the hospital shall not discharge her until doctors certify that she is fit for discharge and will require only outdoor treatment . In effect, the hospital cannot unilaterally decide that its facilities are inadequate or that continued admission is unnecessary; a formal medical certification of fitness is now a precondition for discharge.

The order is of immediate practical significance to the survivor, who faced the prospect of being moved against her will despite a serious ophthalmic condition. It also sends a broader signal to private healthcare providers: in cases covered by the Supreme Court's orders on acid attack survivors, treatment decisions cannot be driven by cost, nor can a hospital resist a case by pleading a lack of specialization.

Bills to Be Placed Before the Court

The Court also dealt with the financial side of the continued care. It said the hospital can forward the treatment bills to the Supreme Court for issuance of directions regarding reimbursement of the expenditure. This gives the hospital a workable mechanism to recover costs while ensuring that the survivor's treatment is not interrupted for want of funds.

The Registry was directed to register the representation made by the woman in person as an application in the case pending before the Court qua acid attack survivors. The procedural direction means the survivor's grievance will now be formally tracked within the larger pending proceedings, allowing the bench to monitor compliance, revisit the treatment plan, or pass further orders if the hospital or the survivor approaches the Court again.

The Rights Framework Behind the Order

The Supreme Court has previously recognized the entitlement of acid attack survivors to receive treatment in any private hospital of their choice. That recognition flows from the constitutional protection of life and personal liberty under Article 21 , which courts have long read to include the right to access timely and adequate medical care.

Acid attacks typically cause catastrophic injuries to the face, eyes, and upper body, and survivors often require multiple rounds of reconstructive surgery, ophthalmic treatment, and long-term rehabilitation. The legal framework surrounding acid attacks includes serious penal consequences for offenders and victim compensation schemes designed to support survivors through treatment and recovery. The present order operates within that framework, ensuring that the survivor's immediate medical needs are met while her larger claims remain part of the pending case.

The insistence that the survivor remain in the hospital of her choice, rather than being shifted to a government facility against her wishes, is consistent with the dignity and autonomy interests that courts have recognized in cases involving survivors of violent crime. The Court's direction that all necessary facilities, including plastic surgery, be provided as and when required also contemplates staged and continuing care, not merely emergency stabilization.

What Happens Next

For now, the survivor remains an indoor patient at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital under judicial protection . The hospital is bound to continue all necessary treatment until its doctors certify that she is fit for discharge and requires only outdoor treatment . Any expenses incurred can be brought before the Supreme Court, which will issue directions on reimbursement.

The representation filed by the woman in person will be processed by the Registry as part of the pending case concerning acid attack survivors. If the hospital fails to comply, or if further disputes arise over the scope or quality of treatment, the matter can be revived before the same bench. Until then, the practical position is clear: the survivor stays, the treatment continues, and the costs will be addressed by the Court.