THE SupremeCourt on Tuesday leftitto the States to take appropriatepolicydecisionstoprotect patients and their attendants from being “fleeced” and taken “undue advantage” of after a PIL alleged that they are compelled topurchasemedicinesandmedical devices at a higherrate from pharmacies run at private hospitals. The apex court also stressed thatanymandatory directionby it may hamper the functioning of private hospitals and have a cascading effect. A benchofJustices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh disposed of a PIL filed by a law student Siddharth Dalmia and his advocate fatherVijay Pal Dalmia that allegedthattheprivatehospitals compel the patients and their attendants to purchase medicines fromin-housepharmacies or those with which they have collaboration, and they are charged higher rates for medicines, implants and medical devices.

 

Thebenchsaid,“Wedispose of this petition with direction to all State Governments to consider this issue and take appropriate policy decisions as they deem fit.” Noting that health is a state subject, the bench said relevant regulatory measures can be taken by the state Governments keeping theirlocal conditions in mind.Highlightingthattheissue falls in the policy domain, the bench said it is for the policymakers to take a holistic view of the matter and frame appropriate guidelines ensuring there isno exploitation of the patientsand their attendants and, at thesame time, there is no discouragement and an unreasonablerestriction for the private entities to enter the health sector.

 

Thetopcourt saiditwouldnotbe advisable for the court toissue any mandatory directionson the PIL to private hospitalsbutemphasisedtheneedtosensitise the state Governmentsabout the alleged problem of fleecing and exploitation of patients and their attendants byprivate hospitals takingundue advantage of their conditions.