The Delhi High Court rejected a plea to shift climate activist Sonam Wangchuk from Safdarjung Hospital to a private medical facility on Sunday [1].
The ruling maintains government control over the activist's medical placement during a period of high visibility for his climate advocacy. This decision underscores the tension between state security protocols and the personal health preferences of political dissidents.
Gitanjali J. Angmo, the wife of Wangchuk, filed the plea seeking an interim order to move him to a private facility [1]. The request followed the government's decision to move Wangchuk from a protest site to the state-run Safdarjung Hospital [2].
Justice Mini Pushkarna presided over the hearing and determined that the government acted within its rights. The court said that the decision to keep Wangchuk at the public hospital was not arbitrary [3].
"Shifting him to Safdarjung Hospital was not arbitrary," Justice Pushkarna said [3].
The court further noted that Wangchuk's health required close monitoring, which the current facility is equipped to provide [1]. The ruling effectively denies the request for a transfer, ensuring the activist remains under the care of the government-managed institution [2].
"The government's decision to move him from the protest site to Safdarjung Hospital could not be termed arbitrary," the court said [2].
“"Shifting him to Safdarjung Hospital was not arbitrary."”
The court's refusal to grant a transfer suggests that the Indian judiciary is prioritizing the state's administrative and monitoring capabilities over the individual's preference for private care in high-profile activism cases. By labeling the government's action as non-arbitrary, the court provides legal cover for the state to maintain custody of activists in public medical facilities during active disputes.
