Sonam Wangchuk's Safardjung hospitalisation decision right: Delhi HC on Gitanjali's Medanta transfer plea—What it said

The Delhi High Court on Sunday declined to issue an interim direction for the discharge of activist Sonam Wangchuk from Safdarjung Hospital, observing that the government’s decision to move him there due to his health condition could not be termed arbitrary, according to Bar and Bench.

In the case of Gitanjali J Angmo v. Union of India & Ors, Justice Mini Pushkarna noted that Wangchuk was under medical supervision and had agreed to receive electrolytes. The court observed that there was no violation of his right to bodily autonomy.

“Considering the overall conspectus, since the government has taken the decision to shift Wangchuk to a hospital due to his health, this Court does not find the same to be an arbitrary action,” the Court noted.

The Court observed that since Sonam Wangchuk had not chosen to admit himself to a hospital despite his health condition, the government was justified in stepping in.

“Considering the fact that Wangchuk, on his own volition, did not check himself into a hospital, the government was within its right to take such action. As already stated by the Division Bench, every life is precious,” it said.

It also noted the government’s submission that Wangchuk’s family members had been given unrestricted access to meet him throughout the day, unlike other patients who could only meet visitors during fixed visiting hours.

The Court further recorded that a separate room had been provided for Wangchuk’s family members. Based on these circumstances, it held that no interim directions were necessary at this stage.

The Court also directed that Wangchuk’s medical reports be shared with his family and scheduled the matter for further hearing on July 24.

What did Kapil Sibal representing Wangchuk say?

Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Sonam Wangchuk before the court, was seeking activist's transfer to the Medanta Hospital, according to Hindustan Times. “We have talked to Medanta. We seek his discharge so that we can go to Medanta. They're going to send an ambulance, and we'll go there and take our treatment there. That's our limited prayer," he mentioned during the hearing.

Sibal argued that Wangchuk was not under detention and that there was no case registered against him. He questioned whether a citizen could be prevented from choosing a hospital of his preference, alleging that the government was exercising control over Wangchuk’s medical decisions.

"He is not in detention. There is no case against him, is a citizen of India not allowed to go to a hospital of his choice? How can they say that the government is taking control of his body and they will not allow him?" Sibal stated.

Sibal said they had no objection to doctors from AIIMS or Safdarjung being included in the medical team. He also claimed that police personnel were stationed around Wangchuk’s room and questioned whether the family was any less concerned about his health than the doctors.

"Is the family less concerned about his health than the doctors?" he said.

He mentioned, “They have absolutely no reason to have any doubt. He is being taken care of. But he has to cooperate with the attending doctors.”

What Centre said

SG Chetan Sharma, appearing for the Centre, submitted that the July 16 order had clearly stated that all medical treatment and interventions for Sonam Wangchuk would be carried out by the government. He said that doctors from Safdarjung Hospital and AIIMS are currently attending to him.

Sharma told the court that prolonged fasting for 18 days, particularly in humid conditions, could result in health complications and informed that Wangchuk has been admitted to the emergency department.

He further stated that Wangchuk was administered sugar-free electrolytes with his consent. According to the ASG, medical tests and blood examinations have been conducted at AIIMS, Safdarjung Hospital, and private laboratories.

The ASG questioned the requirement of allowing a counsel access to Sonam Wangchuk, stating that he is currently admitted to a hospital and not appearing before a court.

"If the Court so feels, we could also have him shifted to AIIMS. But this is not a concession," he stated, adding, “In the prevailing circumstances, whatever happens to him will have consequences. The government will have to be more circumspect and extra cautious.”