The Compass

“We cannot remain a mute spectator in the times of a national crisis”, said the Supreme Court on Tuesday as it sought details of availability of medical oxygen, supply of essential medicines, ramping up of critical medical infrastructure, and the rationale of vaccine pricing from the central government to assess its readiness.

“This is a national crisis and the Supreme Court of India, being the national constitutional court, cannot be a silent spectator… the intervention of this court has to be appreciated in proper perspective. The court has jurisdiction under Article 32 towards the protection of fundamental rights. In the face of a national crisis, the court cannot stand silent as a mute spectator,” said a bench, led by justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, while hearing the matter registered suo motu (on its own).

The bench, which included justices L Nageswara Rao and S Ravindra Bhat, also put the record straight that the Supreme Court was concerned about the national issues that are beyond state boundaries while the jurisdictional high courts can continue to issue suitable directives in the cases being heard by them on the resurgence of the pandemic.

“By the pendency of these proceedings, the high courts are not restrained from continuing to deal with the issue that they are seized of… High courts are best situated to assess the ground realities in each state and come up with flexible solutions for practical concerns of the citizens. The high courts are in a better position to monitor the territorial situation. At the same time, it is also important for the Supreme Court to intervene to look into the systemic, national issues and ensure the coordination at a national level and between the states, which the high courts may find difficult to deal with,” it said.

Fixing the next hearing on Friday, the bench added it wants a “unified national plan” from the central government to serve the needs of citizens of this country. “What have you done till date is one thing but what you plan to do for the future is what we want to know from you…Where do we stand and what have we planned for the future,” the bench told solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who represented the Centre.

Mehta replied that the government has filed a detailed affidavit on Tuesday, elucidating how all available resources are being put to their optimum use in assistance with the state governments, and that the Prime Minister was personally looking into the efforts to deal with the sudden surge in the infection.

Last week, a controversy ensued after a bench led by then CJI SA Bobde took a suo motu cognisance of the surge in infections the day before his retirement and appointed senior advocate Harish Salve as the amicus curiae to assist the court. This, even as Salve represented Vedanta, which wanted to operate its controversial shuttered plant in Tamil Nadu. Several senior advocates such as Indira Jaising, Vikas Singh, Dushyant Dave and Sanjay Hegde questioned the move, asking if this was an endeavour by the Supreme Court to hold the hands of the high courts that were already supervising these issues in their jurisdiction, keeping the Centre and state governments on their toes.