4 min readNew DelhiDec 16, 2025 05:24 PM IST
First published on: Dec 16, 2025 at 04:22 PM IST
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.
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.
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.”
The state subsequently affirmed this rejection order of the authority concerned. Aggrieved by this decision, the recipient-donor duo moved the Kerala High Court.
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) 
Share
