Kerala High Court gives second chance to interfaith friends over kidney donation amid ‘emotional link’ dispute
Interfaith Kidney Donation Case: The court offered one more opportunity to the 62-year-old recipient and the 36-year-old donor to prove their relationship for kidney donation.
4 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Dec 16, 2025 05:24 PM IST
The Kerala High Court has offered another opportunity to joint application of donor-recipient, who were unrelated to each other and belonged to two different faiths. (This image is generated using AI)
Interfaith Organ Donation Case: The Kerala High Court Tuesday gave a second opportunity to two women, one of whom wanted to donate her kidney to the other, claiming to be friends but the state authorities had refused it.
Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen said that the previous rejections by the District Level Authorisation Committee for Renal Transplantation and the state were due to the inconsistency of statements given by the recipient’s son-in-law and the donor’s husband.
“The authority did not consider the documents produced by the applicants in its proper perspective…one more opportunity has to be given to the petitioners to prove their relationship or link between them, which led to the aforementioned kidney donation,” the court said.
The plea was filed jointly by the recipient and donor – belonging to two different faiths – unrelated to each other, to challenge the orders passed by the state and authority, which declined their kidney donation request on the grounds that they failed to establish a “satisfactory link” between them or the “circumstances that prompted the offer of kidney donation”.
The women, who were not “related to each other” but allegedly became friends when the recipient’s son-in-law took contract work for an IT-based company where the donor’s husband was working.
Altruism certificate, letter from MP
The court noted that the petitioners had submitted a certificate of altruism, in which the assistant commissioner of police had stated that the donor had voluntarily consented to donate one of her kidneys to the recipient with her “free will”.
The recipient-donor duo had also placed on record a letter issued by a member of parliament, who stated that both parties were known to her and “no commercial transaction” was involved in the case.
Story continues below this ad
While directing the authority concerned to reconsider the matter, the court took into consideration that the donor has two children, and her husband is a patient with blood pressure issues and suffers from memory loss.
Arguments
Advocate K Sandesh Raja, representing the donor and recipient, argued that the authority concerned rejected their joint application “without any proper reason”.
Raja further contended that the authority failed to consider the certificate of altruism along with the letter produced by a member of parliament.
On the contrary, the government pleader, representing the state, argued that the previous rejection of the application was on valid grounds since the recipient-donor duo petitioners failed to prove the link between them.
Story continues below this ad
Therefore, he submitted that the matter did not call for any interference by the high court.
Background
A chronic kidney patient and her donor, who were not related to each other, filed a joint application under Section 9(5) of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994, to facilitate this kidney transplant, but were rejected by the authority concerned.
Section 9(5) of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 deals with application from the donor and the recipient and approval for the removal and transplantation of the human organ.
The concerned committee rejected the women’s request, holding that the application for live kidney donation between the parties did not meet the mandatory conditions for approval, particularly in the absence of substantial proof of a “genuine emotional bond, coupled with concerns about the donor’s health and vulnerability.”
Story continues below this ad
The state subsequently affirmed this rejection order of the authority concerned. Aggrieved by this decision, the recipient-donor duo moved the Kerala High Court.
Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express, where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape.
Expertise
Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen.
Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on:
Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts.
Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy.
Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More
