The Supreme Court has called upon State governments to formulate policies to address concerns over unreasonable charges and the alleged exploitation of patients in private hospitals.

The directive came in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which raised concerns about private hospitals compelling patients to purchase medicines and medical supplies exclusively from in-house pharmacies at exorbitant rates.

A Bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotishwar Singh observed that while the issue warranted attention, it would not be prudent for the Supreme Court to impose mandatory directions, as such interference could hinder the growth of the private healthcare sector. Instead, the Court emphasized that policy decisions should be left to State governments.

"Policy-makers are best equipped to take a holistic view and formulate guidelines that safeguard patients and their attendants from exploitation while simultaneously ensuring that private entities are not discouraged from investing in the health sector," the Bench stated.

Acknowledging the crucial role of private hospitals in supplementing the country’s healthcare infrastructure, the Court noted that both citizens and governments rely on these institutions for basic and specialized medical care. Given the challenges faced by States in expanding public healthcare facilities, the government has encouraged private investment, leading to the establishment of world-class hospitals in India.

While recognizing the fundamental right to health under Article 21 of the Constitution, the Court refrained from issuing direct regulatory orders, instead urging State governments to consider the issue and take appropriate policy decisions.

The petitioners, who had personally experienced financial strain due to high medical costs during a family member's cancer treatment, contended that such practices amounted to economic exploitation. They argued that the absence of regulatory mechanisms had enabled hospitals to impose excessive charges, necessitating judicial intervention.

The Court ultimately disposed of the petition, directing all States to evaluate the matter and implement policy measures as they deem fit to balance patient protection with the growth of private healthcare services.

Case Title: Siddharth Dalmia & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors.,