Rajasthan High Court orders Centre, State to pay ₹4 lakh to woman forced to give birth on road

The Rajasthan High Court on Tuesday directed the Union of India and Rajasthan government to pay a compensation of ₹4 lakh to a woman who was forced to deliver two children - who died later- in the middle of the road in 2016 [Phoolmati vs State Medical And Healthors]. .Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand said the women lost the two children due to the “reckless and negligent behaviour” of the staff posted at Community Health Centre (CHC) in Khedli in an incident which shows the “death of humanity”.The Court also directed the authorities to conclude departmental enquiry against the delinquent persons in accordance with law. It deprecated the inaction in this regard. .On April 7, 2016, one Phoolmati (petitioner) was refused treatment in absence of the Mamta card which had been introduced to benefit pregnant women. She later delivered the children on the road. While one of them died on the way to hospital, the other one died for want of medical attention. She moved the High Court in 2016 seeking action against the erring health staff and effective implementation of various schemes meant for pregnant women..The Court at the outset noted that cluster of schemes National Maternity Benefit Scheme (NMBS), National Family Benefit Scheme (NFBS), National Rural Health Mission (NRHM), Janani Suraksha Yojna (JSY), Janani Shishu Suraksha Karyakaram (JSSK) have been framed by the Government of India to reduce infant and maternal mortality.“In spite of having the aforementioned several beneficial Scheme for the welfare of pregnant females and infants, the respondents have miserably failed to discharge their duties in providing the benefits of these Schemes to the petitioner and her newly born infants,” it observed..On Centre’s role in implementation of the schemes, the Court said the Government of India was escaping from its liability only on a technical ground that health is a state subject. Right to health is a national campaign initiated by the Central government and responsibility for maintaining good health must rest squarely on the shoulders of the Union of India, the Court underscored. “It is rather unfortunate that now the Union of India is treating the subject ‘Health’ as a public health issue and making it the concern of the State Governments. This is simply not permissible and appears to be a case of passing the buck,” Justice Dhand remarked. .Though the Court also acknowledged that implementation of the schemes rests on State, it stressed that Union’s cooperation with the State government is indispensable to the success of such programmes.In the given structure of cooperative federalism, the Union of India cannot confine its obligation to mere enactment of a scheme without ensuring its realisation and implementation, the Court said. The Court also commented on the duty of medical professionals to extend assistance for preserving life. In the present case, it found there was gross negligence and failure. “Therefore, on account of denial to provide the minimum benefits of the aforementioned Schemes to the petitioner, the Union of India and the State Government would be jointly and severely liable to pay her compensation in the sum of ₹4 Lakhs within a period of three months,” ordered the Court..However, the Court clarified that the amount will be deposited in a fixed deposit for a period of three years and interest accrued will be transferred to Phoolmati’s account every quarter. The petitioner would be able to encash the fixed deposit only after the completion of the period of three years, it added.In addition, the Court also ordered payment of ₹25,000 to the petitioner within a period of three months..With regard to her prayer for effective implementation of the schemes, the Court directed the Union of India and Government of Rajasthan to address the shortcomings by constituting a Joint High Powered Committee.The Court also passed the various directions including directions for increasing the cash amount given to the pregnant women before and after delivery..Advocate Sudhindra Kumawat represented the petitioner.Additional Solicitor General RD Rastogi and Advocate CS Sinha represented Union of India.Additional Government Counsel Bharat Saini represented the State of Rajasthan.[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.