The picture is for illustrative functions solely. |Photograph courtesy: Getty Photos/iStockphoto
The Union authorities on Thursday (12 March 2026) caught by 2017 pointers that exclude transgender individuals, males who’ve intercourse with males (MSM) and feminine intercourse staff from donating blood. The middle argued earlier than the Supreme Courtroom that these are “at-risk” teams and that in some circumstances public well being concerns should take priority over particular person rights.
Showing earlier than a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Extra Solicitor Common Aishwari Bhati stated the federal government’s stand was based mostly on professional recommendation and conserving in thoughts the bigger public curiosity. Regulation officers argued that any dilution of the rules would put lives in danger.
The courtroom was listening to a sequence of petitions difficult the 2017 Blood Donor Choice and Referral Pointers issued by the Nationwide Council on Blood Transfusion and the Nationwide Group for AIDS Management.
“Discrimination based mostly on sexuality and gender id”
Jayna Kothari, a senior advocate for the petitioners, questioned the rules and argued that segments of the inhabitants shouldn’t be discriminated towards on the premise of sexuality or gender id.
Kothari stated extra complete assessments similar to nucleic acid testing – a delicate molecular approach used to detect the genetic materials (DNA or RNA) of viruses similar to HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C in donated blood – may very well be a extra medically acceptable approach to cowl well being dangers for transfusion sufferers.
Senior advocates argued that heterosexual individuals might additionally pose a danger to recipients. “The dangerous act is unprotected intercourse. It is not my id. There could also be different straight males who might have dedicated the dangerous act,” Kothari reasoned.
Public well being perspective
Nonetheless, the courtroom expressed reluctance to intervene, pointing to poor sufferers who can’t afford personal hospitals and depend on free blood transfusion services. The courtroom agreed to listen to the matter in additional element at a later date, saying even a 1 % likelihood of an infection needs to be averted.
The petition seeks to repeal provisions within the donor choice standards of the 2017 Blood Donor Choice and Referral Pointers that completely defer blood donations for these populations as a result of danger of HIV, hepatitis infections, and transfusion-transmitted infections (TTIs).
“This situation needs to be judged from a public well being perspective, not a person rights perspective…Even when contemplating the steadiness between the person rights of blood donors and the rights of recipients, the recipient’s proper to obtain a secure blood transfusion far outweighs the person’s proper to donate blood,” the division responded in a 2023 affidavit.
