Activist Sonam Wangchuk’s wife, Gitanjali Angmo, has moved a Delhi high court division bench against a single-judge bench’s order refusing to permit her to transfer him from Delhi’s Safdarjung Hospital to a private hospital. Her petition was expected to be mentioned before a bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia at 10:30am, for urgent listing on Monday.
Event Context
Team Analysis
Angmo cited the order and said it said the team attending to Wangchuk will take “the ultimate decision” regarding the assessment of his medical condition, as per strict medical protocols to protect his life and ensure his safety, and continuously monitor his vitals. “Therefore, the Impugned Order effectively strips away the Appellant’s fundamental rights of bodily autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” the petition said. “The impugned order records that the Petitioner is not named in any criminal proceedings and that there is no detention order against him.”
The plea said the order issues a carte blanche order which illegally confines Wangchuk to Safdurjung Hospital and allows for the administering of food without his consent. It argued that the manner in which Wangchuk was carried away in front of a crowd at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar protest site was aimed at thwarting his right to protest. Angmo said the action was evidently meant to “send a chilling effect” within the community of supporters who have been protesting for over a month. She added that the order characterised the action as not being arbitrary.
Match Outlook
Justice Mini Pushkarna, in a special sitting on Sunday, declined to immediately permit Angmoto shift Wangchuk to a private hospital, observing that the government’s decision to admit him to Safdarjung Hospital had been taken in view of his medical condition and could not be termed “arbitrary.”
In her petition, Angmo said that the impugned order failed to address the issue of informed consent and did not engage with the argument that the right to medical treatment necessarily encompasses an individual’s autonomy to partially accept or completely refuse any intervention. She added that, in effect, the order unlawfully confines and restrains Wangchuk within the premises of Safdarjung Hospital, without any formal order of arrest or detention, thereby resulting in an illegal deprivation of his personal liberty.
Angmo argued that taking an individual away from his site of his choosing without his consent or any sign of deteriorating health, in this case, is one of the most arbitrary actions a state can take. “This arbitrariness is compounded by the fact that he is not allowed to move out of a government-chosen place despite the next of kin as well as the individual asserting their constitutional rights.”
The Delhi Police on Saturday hospitalised Wangchuk, who had been on an indefinite hunger strike for 21 days over irregularities in examinations. They argued that the move was aimed at monitoring his health in line with court directions.
Opposition parties accused the government of using force against a peaceful protest and questioned the timing of the action, a day after the appointment of a new Delhi Police commissioner. The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party defended the police action, saying it was taken to protect Wangchuk’s health.
Supporters said Wangchuk was forcibly removed, triggering a commotion at the protest site, during which they were allegedly baton-charged and Cockroach Janata Party founder Abhijeet Dipke was briefly detained.
