Delhi High Court refuses to stay administration of HPV vaccine after Centre assures it is safe

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to stay the administration of the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, Gardasil, to adolescent girls.

A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia noted the government's submissions that over 55 lakh HPV vaccines have been administered till date and only 120 of them showed minor signs of nausea or headache.

The government also told the Court that the vaccine is not part of the Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP).

"The justification for introducing the vaccine is something we will consider, but so far as your prayer for stopping administration of the vaccine is concerned, we are not going to stay that. We have been given data that suggest that there is no harm. There may not be long-term benefit, but there is no immediate harm," the Court remarked.

The High Court passed the order while hearing a PIL filed by gynaecologist Dr ⁠Sujata Mittal and fitness influencer Jitendra Chauksey raising questions over the data, efficacy and the requirement of the vaccine.

During the previous hearing of the case on July 22, the Court had said that the issue is extremely important and asked for the government's response.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma and Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) Ashish Dixit appeared for the government today and presented relevant data before the Court.

"Over 55 crore vaccinations have happened worldwide. Nearly 160 countries out of 190 have already used this, and in Australia it is a complete sweep. It’s [HPV] on the verge of extinction. This is preventable cervical cancer, so this vaccination has world over beneiffited 55 crore people," Sharma said.

The counsel appearing for the petitioners reiterated that there is an absence of data on the side effects of the vaccine and there is no study on its long-term effects.

The Court said that every vaccine has some side effects and an opinion on whether it is to be administered or not has to be formed by experts.

"We see no reason why the administration of the vaccine should be stopped," the Court said.

It also told the Central government that "half-baked vaccines" should not be administered.

ASG Sharma told the Bench that the vaccines are only being administered through the government and appropriate measures have been taken.

Ultimately, the Court asked the Central government, Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) and the National Immunization Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) to file their response to the PIL.

In their plea, the petitioners have argued that vaccination is being done in schools and targets are being given to frontline health workers, including ASHA workers, to increase enrolment, which in many cases leads to undue pressure on young girls.

They cited the case of a 14-year-old girl from Tamil Nadu who allegedly developed severe neurological complications, including paralysis-like weakness, loss of voice and impaired vision, days after receiving the vaccine in March 2026.

It was argued that the nationwide rollout of the vaccine without conclusive studies and informed consent violates constitutional rights to bodily autonomy and personal liberty.

Senior Advocate Gyanendra Kumar along with advocates Rohit Kumar, Divyanshi Pundhir, Sugandh Virmani, Nikhil Bhasin, Ritik Kumar, Rupali Gujral, Shailendra Singh and Shaileshwar Yadav appeared for the petitioners.