Make accessible and circulate SOPs, guidelines on Indians who die abroad: Delhi HC to MEA

The Bench’s order came on an appeal against a single judge’s 2018 order pertaining to issues arising from the death of an Indian man in the Maldives.

The Centre’s counsel said the SOPs for transportation of mortal remains of both Indian tourists and workers are already in place. It was stated that in the case of Indian tourists, “ordinarily all Indian Missions/Posts coordinate with the family of the deceased for transportation of the mortal remains”. In exceptional circumstances of lack of resources, the mission concerned and the MEA make appropriate arrangements, often using the Indian Community Welfare Fund (ICWF) established by the mission, he said.

The Centre further said that in case of a worker, the coordination is done between the nominated family members of the deceased, the insurance company and the employer and the “Indian Mission closely monitors the entire exercise”, pursuant to which the Bench disposed of the plea.

The petitioner had moved the High Court in a writ petition seeking various reliefs, including directions to the MEA to instruct the Indian Embassy at the Maldives to initiate criminal action against a doctor in that country who had treated the petitioner’s son when he was on a vacation at a resort there. It was also prayed that directions be given to Home Secretary, government of Maharashtra, to send the “preserved viscera” of the petitioner’s deceased son to All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, for complete re-examination and report the cause of death, reasons for death and the mode of death after examination of the reports.

Observing that the reliefs sought were unmerited, the single judge had said,”Assuming that the allegations of medical negligence made by the petitioner are correct, the same would relate to a treatment provided to the petitioner’s son in the Maldives and, therefore, action, if any, is required to be taken by the authorities in Maldives. The petitioner is not precluded in any manner from pursuing any action against the concerned doctor.”

On re-examination of the documents for determining the cause of death, the judge had said that JJ Hospital at Mumbai had already submitted its report indicating the cause of death and this court is not persuaded to accept that any further directions in this regard are necessary. It had further said that no directions were required to be issued to the Medical Council of India as the doctor in question did not practice in India and there was no averment that his name is entered into Indian Medical Register.