The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought responses from the Centre and the Delhi Government on a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking urgent medical intervention for climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, who has been on an indefinite hunger strike at Jantar Mantar since June 28, and listed the matter for further hearing on Thursday.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Tejas Karia heard submissions made by petitioner Rakesh Kumar Saini, who appeared virtually as petitioner-in-person and urged the Court to treat the matter as urgent in view of Wangchuk’s deteriorating health.
The petitioner submitted that Wangchuk’s condition had worsened due to the prolonged fast, necessitating immediate judicial intervention to safeguard his life.
Taking note of the urgency involved, the Bench issued notices to the Union Government and the Delhi Government and directed them to clarify their stand on the issues raised in the petition.
The Court also recorded that no counsel appeared for the respondents as lawyers of the Delhi High Court were abstaining from work following a call by the Delhi High Court Bar Association to boycott court proceedings in protest against the proposed enhancement of the pecuniary jurisdiction of district courts. Consequently, no law officer or government counsel was available to assist the Bench.
The PIL has sought directions to the Centre and the Delhi Government to immediately provide appropriate medical treatment and life-saving intervention to Wangchuk and initiate dialogue with him regarding the issues raised during his protest. It has further sought directions to ensure that all necessary medical support, including emergency care and nutritional assistance, is made available to protect his life.
According to the petition, Wangchuk has reportedly lost around 8.25 kilograms since commencing his hunger strike and is suffering from recurrent episodes of low blood sugar, dizziness, severe weakness and muscle loss.
The plea contends that while a peaceful hunger strike is a constitutionally protected form of protest, the State has a corresponding constitutional obligation to safeguard the life and health of every citizen and take timely measures to prevent avoidable loss of life.
Referring to reports regarding Wangchuk’s deteriorating condition, the petitioner argued that the government cannot remain a passive spectator when the life of a citizen is at imminent risk.
The matter will now be taken up for further hearing on Thursday.
