Bombay HC Asks for MCGM’s Reply to the PIL Asserting that Pregnant Women are Denied Admission in Hospitals for Not Carrying COVID-19 Reports

Must Read

Kerala High Court Rejects Writ Petition for Rejection of Loan Application

Case: Anvardeen. K v. Union of India. Coram: Justice P.V. Asha On 24th November 2020, The Kerala High Court involving a...

Supreme Court: Maritime Board Must Not Wallow in Inaction and Be Arbitrary in Its Contractual Duties

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that a State instrumentality such as the Maritime Board is expected...

Supreme Court: Right to Property Is a Constitutional Right, the Essence of Rule of Law Protects It

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that permitting the State to assert indefinite right upon one’s...

Madras High Court Directs Tahsildar To Issue Origin Certificates To Two Sisters in Two Writ Petitions

Two Writ Petitions by two siblings was filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The petitions owed to...

Delhi High Court Directs Centre and Delhi Govt To Consider a PIL Seeking Paid Menstrual Leave as Representation

The Delhi High Court had provided direction to consider a petition as representation. The Central and Delhi governments were...

Follow us

The Bombay High Court directs Mumbai Corporation to analyse the details of clinics. A PIL was filed to examine such information. It asked to cater to the needs of pregnant women while hearing PIL as said above. The matter was heard by video conferencing due to lockdown under the pandemic situation.

Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice AA Sayed heard the case as per the guidelines for the Courts.

Introduction

A pregnant woman was denied for delivery at JJ Hospital. She was denied on the ground of not carrying a negative COVID-19 report with her. The bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice AA Sayed heard the PIL filed. Mohiuddin Vaid filed this PIL.

He cites the directions to the Corporation to adopt proper measures for pregnant women.

Arguments Stated

AGP Jyoti Chavan fervently contests the allegation put in PIL. She showed the affidavit filed on behalf of the State. She referred to no such incident occurring at JJ Hospital, Mumbai. Senior Counsel AY Sakhare appears for the Corporation. He argues that there are many maternity homes and clinics which are catering to the needs of such ladies. Furthermore, he demanded for a stipulated period to file an affidavit. He focuses on to make the position of the Corporation clear.

Court’s Decision

The Court directs MCGM to file an affidavit. It asked to provide the names and details of maternity homes and clinics. It also required to give the number of deliveries that occurred over the last few weeks in the clinic. The Court said:

“We propose to dispose of this PIL Petition on the next date. The PIL was disposed of by looking into the details furnished by the Corporation in its affidavit.”

The report says pregnant ladies in the city have borne the brunt of stressed healthcare system caused due to the pandemic disease. In a relevant case, a nine-month pregnant lady faced denial of admission in Bandra by a private hospital. The lady got denied as she was not carrying a COVID-19 report. It is distressful as a pregnant woman needs much more attention in such durations.

Moreover, surviving in such an environment and fighting for two lives simultaneously is difficult. Such women must get the necessary facilities at least till the delivery. Hospital administrators and government bureaucrats need to plan a specific system. The system must include a safe pick and drop system in such a pandemic situation.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Supreme Court : High Courts Have Sole Authority Under Article 226 To Decide Validity of Tax Provision, Even if Matter Is Sub-Judice Before Income...

A Full Bench of the Supreme Court held that the validity of a provision is a serious matter which could only be decided by...

Kerala High Court Rejects Writ Petition for Rejection of Loan Application

Case: Anvardeen. K v. Union of India. Coram: Justice P.V. Asha On 24th November 2020, The Kerala High Court involving a single bench judge of the...

Supreme Court: Maritime Board Must Not Wallow in Inaction and Be Arbitrary in Its Contractual Duties

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that a State instrumentality such as the Maritime Board is expected to act without any arbitrariness...

Supreme Court: Right to Property Is a Constitutional Right, the Essence of Rule of Law Protects It

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that permitting the State to assert indefinite right upon one’s property, without any legal sanction...

Madras High Court Directs Tahsildar To Issue Origin Certificates To Two Sisters in Two Writ Petitions

Two Writ Petitions by two siblings was filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The petitions owed to the fact that they were...

Delhi High Court Directs Centre and Delhi Govt To Consider a PIL Seeking Paid Menstrual Leave as Representation

The Delhi High Court had provided direction to consider a petition as representation. The Central and Delhi governments were directed to consider the same....

Madras High Court Reiterates That ‘Ignorance of Law’ Is Not an Excuse and Dismisses Petition by a Constable

A Constable committed bigamy and deserted his service for more than 21 days. After dismissal from his service, he moved to Tamil Nadu Administrative...

Transfer of Winding-up Proceedings Allowed Under S. 434, Restrictions Under 2016 Rules To Not Apply: Allahabad High Court

This appeal relates to the question of transfer of winding-up proceeding from the High Court (Company Court) to the NCLT.  Facts M/s. Girdhar Trading Company, 2nd...

Constitutional Court of South Africa Declares Provisions of Domestic Workers’ Injury Compensation Legislation To Be Unconstitutional

The Constitutional Court of South Africa in Sylvia Mahlangu v Minister of Labour , declared parts of the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases...

Bail Granted Under Section 167(2) CrPC Can Be Cancelled Under Section 439(2) CrPC: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the right of default bail of the Accused can be cancelled under Section 439(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Facts...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -