What did the Court Say Regarding the Change of Hospital in the Sonam Wangchuk Case?

The Delhi High Court made significant observations regarding an appeal to transfer social activist and educationist Sonam Wangchuk, who was hospitalised following a prolonged hunger strike, to another hospital.

During the hearing of the writ petition filed by Wangchuk's wife, Gitanjali J. Angmo, the court said that the current circumstances did not warrant an interim order to shift him from Safdarjung Hospital to another facility. At the same time, the court noted the need for doctors to continue regular health monitoring.

In a writ petition filed in the Delhi High Court, Sonam Wangchuk's wife, Gitanjali J. Angmo, permission to transfer her husband from Safdarjung Hospital to a hospital of his choice. During the hearing, her lawyer stated that Medanta Hospital in Gurugram is prepared to treat Wangchuk and suggested that doctors from AIIMS and Safdarjung Hospital could also be involved in the treatment process if necessary.

The petitioner further argued that Sonam Wangchuk has previously undertaken hunger strikes lasting 30 to 35 days and is fully aware of his decisions. They argued that since he is not in custody in connection with any case, he should not be confined to a specific hospital without his or his family's consent. Objections were also raised regarding the deployment of police personnel outside his room.

The Solicitor General, appearing on behalf of the Centre, informed the court that Sonam Wangchuk’s physical condition was rapidly down. So, the decision was made to transfer him to Safdarjung Hospital to safeguard his life. The government also submitted medical records prepared by the hospital's medical board to the court.

According to the government, Doctors were particularly concerned about the drop in his sodium, sugar, and potassium levels below the normal range. The court was also informed that a dangerously low potassium level could lead to a life-threatening situation.

After hearing the submissions from all parties and the opinions of the attending doctors, the court observed that, on the evidence, it appeared the government had decided to move Sonam Wangchuk to Safdarjung Hospital due to the weakening of his physical condition.

Therefore, this decision could not be deemed unfair or unlawful on the face of it. In the court's view, safeguarding a citizen's life is one of the government's most important responsibilities, and the step was taken to fulfil that very need under the current circumstances.

The government informed the court that no medical treatment was administered to Sonam Wangchuk without his consent. Court records indicate that he refused to accept intravenous (IV) fluids; so, doctors administered only sugar-free oral electrolytes, Potchlor syrup, and potassium chloride based on his consent.

Based on this information, the court observed that no pressure is being exercised against him and that there is no evidence at this stage of any violation of his bodily autonomy.

It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that Sonam Wangchuk was not arrested for any offence and was a free citizen. Responding to this argument, the court observed that taking someone to the hospital to safeguard their life does not amount to a deprivation of their personal liberty.

In the judge's view, Wangchuk had not freely admitted himself to the hospital despite the weakening of his physical condition. Under these circumstances, there is no reason to consider the measures taken by the government to ensure his safety as possibly criminal.

During the hearing, the court was informed that Sonam Wangchuk's wife, brother, and brother-in-law have been granted permission to visit him at the hospital around the clock. Furthermore, a separate room has been arranged for them within the hospital premises so that they can stay close to him.

Towards the end of the hearing, the petitioner's counsel requested the court to direct that all of Sonam Wangchuk's medical reports be handed over to his family.

In response, the government informed the court that all medical reports from the hospital would be shared with the family members. The court recorded this submission by the government. Additionally, the date for the next hearing of the case has been fixed for July 24, 2026.

For More Details, Check Here: Click Here