‘Can’t be forced to stay’: Sonam Wangchuk’s wife challenges Safdarjung move

The bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia asked the in-charge director of AIIMS and a doctor from the team treating and monitoring Wangchuk to be present in the court on Tuesday. The court said it will consider Angmo’s request on Tuesday once all medical reports and opinions are put on record.

Addressing Angmo’s counsel, senior advocate Akhil Sibal, Chief Justice Upadhyaya remarked, “Values of parameters may vary from lab to lab. The pathological reports are always to be corroborated with the clinical condition. There might be a situation where blood picture may suggest an infection but may not have fever. So whether or not your body is affected or not cannot be solely decided on lab reports.”

The court added, “We want to know his health condition as of today. Please bring it on record and we will take a call. What about the other reports (testing other parameters apart from sodium and potassium levels in blood)?”

Appearing for Angmo, Sibal referred to the Delhi High Court order on July 16, which asked the Centre to monitor Wangchuk’s condition and intervene when needed. “All of a sudden, my husband is forcibly taken away from the protest site and taken to Safdarjung Hospital, and this is done purportedly under the cover of the court’s order… In our reading, this order is beneficial in nature, not that you will come with a police force to take him away to a hospital,” he told the bench. Chief Justice Upadhyaya asked, “Should a doctor wait to take a patient to ICU and then only drug will be administered?”

Emphasising Wangchuk’s right to choice, Sibal said, “It is a matter of his choice, he is willing to take discharge against medical advice so that no blame falls on the doctors, but today he does not want to be restrained to those premises, he is feeling bound, he says so… He has a right to protest.”

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed Angmo’s emphasis on Wangchuk’s bodily autonomy to make his medical decisions. Mehta countered during the hearing, “The right to bodily autonomy cannot be absolute. Normally, under any circumstances, it is their bodily autonomy to take treatment or not, but when the potential loss of life has an impact on law and order situation, that is where the state’s interests come in.”

“For a person who is exercising his right to protest, suppose tomorrow if someone is to say, that unless and until my demand is met I’ll commit suicide… then the interest of the state, that is public interest, comes. It will be the duty of the state then to ensure that health does not deteriorate further,” Mehta added.

The two-judge bench was hearing Angmo’s challenge to an order disallowing Wangchuk from availing treatment at a healthcare facility of his choice. On Sunday, the bench of Justice Pushkarna refused relief to Wangchuk and asked him to “cooperate” with medical advice.

Wangchuk continues to observe his fast. Angmo told the media on Sunday that he would end his hunger strike if political leaders met him at Safdarjung Hospital and assured him that the issue of education accountability will be raised during the monsoon session of Parliament, beginning on Monday.

Wangchuk’s hunger strike energised the Cockroach Janta Party’s protest to demand the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over paper leaks of competitive exams, including NEET-UG. The CJP on Monday organised a march to Parliament to press for Pradhan’s resignation. Protesters clashed with security forces at several places on the route from Jantar Mantar to Parliament.

Around 10,000 protesters gather near Jantar Mantar, leading the Delhi Police to rush additional reinforcements. (PTI)

Ex JNUSU chief’s petition

Besides Angmo’s petition, the Delhi High Court will hear a PIL by former JNUSU president Ghosh, challenging police’s “indiscriminate and intrusive surveillance” of protesters. Senior advocate Nandita Rao, appearing for Ghosh, told the court, “These are students peacefully protesting…what legitimate state purpose would be served (by this surveillance)? It is raining, the girls are drenched, you’re making their videos while they are sleeping, 24X7. The kind of machan (shed) they’ve set up, these are not animals, these are the youth, young citizens of this country.”

“I have been a police counsel for 10 years, I have not seen an office order permitting this kind of surveillance…We are young people with a whole future ahead of us… people are also being threatened that this will be sent to your parents and to your institutions. Surveillance has to have some contours; we are not a police state,” she said. Ghosh’s petition will also be heard on Tuesday.