The Supreme Court has initiated suo motu proceedings
concerning delays in access to life-saving medicines and the need for prompt
judicial intervention in cases implicating the fundamental right to life under
Article 21 of the Constitution. The matter came before the Court following
reports highlighting the extraordinary delay in the adjudication of a writ
petition pending before the Kerala High Court, where the case had reportedly
been adjourned 57 times before the patient at the centre of the litigation
passed away without obtaining a final judicial determination on the issues
raised. Taking note of the serious constitutional implications arising from
such prolonged delays, a Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice
Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohan considered it appropriate to exercise its
suo motu jurisdiction to examine the broader issues surrounding timely access
to essential medical treatment and judicial efficiency.
During the proceedings, the State of Kerala informed the
Court that, after the formation of the new State Government, the authorities
had imported and supplied the required medicines to the patient. However,
despite these efforts, the patient had unfortunately passed away before the
legal issues concerning access to the medication could be conclusively decided.
The Supreme Court took note of the fact that the writ petition had remained
pending for an exceptionally long period despite repeated listings and observed
that such delays in matters involving life-saving medical treatment raised
significant concerns regarding the effective enforcement of the constitutional
guarantee of the right to life. Consequently, the Court issued notice in the suo
motu proceedings, permitted interested counsel to intervene and assist the
Court, and requested the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court to ensure the
expeditious disposal of Writ Petition No. 18999 of 2022, which remained pending
before the High Court.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Anand Grover sought
permission to intervene, contending that the case extended far beyond the facts
of an individual patient's grievance and reflected a much larger systemic issue
concerning the affordability and accessibility of patented life-saving
medicines across India. It was submitted that many newly developed medicines
are protected by patents and remain financially inaccessible to a substantial
section of the population. Counsel argued that although the Patents Act
empowers the Central Government to grant compulsory licences in appropriate
circumstances to facilitate wider public access to essential medicines, these
statutory powers have rarely been exercised. It was pointed out that only a
single compulsory licence had reportedly been issued since 2005, highlighting
what was described as a significant gap between the legislative framework and
its practical implementation.
The Bench was further informed that the Kerala High Court
had already registered a suo motu Public Interest Litigation, titled In Re:
Exorbitant Pricing of Life Saving Patented Medicines, after the death of the
original petitioner. The High Court subsequently broadened the scope of the
proceedings from an individual dispute to a larger public interest matter aimed
at examining the systemic challenges posed by the pricing of patented
medicines. It was submitted that a comprehensive determination by the High
Court could lay the foundation for principles and guidelines capable of being
applied across the country. Taking note of the continuing delay in the disposal
of the matter despite numerous adjournments, the Supreme Court observed that
although it had initially been inclined to allow the High Court to adjudicate
the issue independently, the persistent lack of progress necessitated
intervention. Accordingly, the Court permitted the intervention application,
issued formal notice on the wider national issues concerning access to
life-saving medicines, and requested the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court
to ensure that the pending proceedings are concluded without further delay.