Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
In the spirit of supporting soldiers who “serve the nation by defending its borders”, the Delhi High Court has come to the aid of an HIV-positive BSF constable and granted his plea that his transfer from Delhi to a remote region in West Bengal be delayed.
“On the eve of Independence Day, when the entire nation is in the mood of celebration of freedom, we are confronted with a case which spells gloom, but hopefully not doom of a government servant, who has served the nation in defending its borders, as a constable in the Border Security Force,” the court of Justice Kailash Gambhir and Justice Najmi Waziri said while staying the transfer orders of the constable.
The Constable is HIV-positive while his wife suffers from AIDS. Their child is also HIV-positive. According to the plea filed before the High Court, the constable was transferred to Delhi on medical grounds to allow him and his family get proper treatment for their condition. However, in July, the constable received transfer orders to West Bengal.
In his plea before the court, the constable, through advocate Kamal Katyan, argued that the hospital where he and his wife are being treated has advised him to stay in Delhi for six more months for further treatment.
“If he is made to join the said post, then the treatment of the petitioner and his entire family will be adversely affected putting their lives in jeopardy,” the court noted.
“Human life is paramount. Such cases deserve to be considered with due care, compassion and an appreciation of all facts relating to it. The state is expected not only to safeguard human life but also to provide best medical care to its countless citizens suffering from such afflictions, albeit within its financial means. The case of the petitioner is a prime example in which his family’s treatment should not be disturbed,” the court said in its order.
In its order issued on Wednesday, the court also observed that since the affliction of HIV carries an “unwarranted stigma and social ostracism”, there was an “immediate need” to provide aid.
“Therefore, not only would it be incumbent upon the government to counter such unwarranted stigma and prejudice and to prevent instances of ostracizing of such patients, especially children afflicted by the disease…,” the court said.
Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram