Connect with us

National News Legal

On Nagpur doctor’s PIL, Supreme Court orders government to provide PPE to doctors, paramedics

SC took cognisance of a PIL filed by Dr Jerryl Banait and asked the centre to provide PPE to all health professionals taking care of COVID-19 patients.
Dr Jerryl Banait

The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday took cognisance of a PIL filed by Nagpur-based Dr Jerryl Banait and asked the centre to provide PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) and security to all doctors, paramedics and other health staff taking care of coronavirus affected patients in India. Similar PILs were also filed by Dr Arushi Jain and lawyer Amit Sahni.

In the matter of Dr Jerryl Banait Vs Union of India, the apex court issued directions urging the central and state governments to ensure the safety and well-being of doctors and healthcare workers.

The directions issued by the SC on basis of the PIL filed were:

? To ensure the availability of PPE to all heath workers including doctors, nurses, ward boys, other medical and paramedical professionals.

? To provide necessary Police security to the doctors and medical staff including those going out to collect samples.

? To take necessary actions against people who obstruct and commit any offence in respect to performance of duties by doctors, medical staff and other Government officials.

? To increase the production capacity of PPE and to ensure that protective equipment are domestically produced and impose necessary restrictions on their export.

Also read: COVID-19 tests at private labs across India should be made free, orders Supreme Court

Speaking about the reason behind filing the petition, Dr Jerryl told Nation Next: ?Before the lockdown, my elder brother Dr Yash Banait was posted at Terminal 2 of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport. He was part of a 30-member team of doctors, who were screening the passengers for Coronavirus. My parents, and several my friends, who are doctors, treat patients regularly. I observed that my brother, my parents and my friends who are dealing with potential positive patients first hand lack necessary equipment to protect themselves from COVID-19. This compelled me to file the PIL.

Dr Jerryl added, If doctors and all health professionals are not protected, it can lead to a very catastrophic situation in the country. If doctors contract the virus, the patients he meets may contract the virus and also an absence of even one doctor may imbalance the working conditions of the staff.

Speaking about the ill-treatment received by doctors treating COVID-19 patients, Dr Jerryl said, People are mistreating doctors, who are coming out of their comfort zone to help coronavirus patients. It is simply not acceptable. There have been instances where doctors have been threatened and have been accused of spreading virus. Doctors are already struggling to keep their family safe. Doctors must be provided with facilities of isolation rooms so that they don’t have to come back to their families and risk spreading the virus. There must also be separate transportation facilities for them.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Legal

Karnataka High Court says wearing hijab non-essential practice in Islam; upholds ban

Published

on

By

Radhika Dhawad | Bengaluru

Representational image

Representational image

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday upheld hijab ban by dismissing petitions filed by a section of Muslim students from the Government Pre-University Girls College in Udupi seeking permission to wear hijab inside classrooms.


The court upheld the state government ban by saying, The prescription of school uniforms is a reasonable restriction.


The court further said hijab was not an essential religious practice in Islam. However, the petitioners are likely to challenge the ban in the Supreme Court.


“Met my clients in Hijab matter in Udupi. Moving to SC soon In sha Allah. These girls will In sha Allah continue their education while exercising their rights to wear Hijab. These girls have not lost hope in Courts and Constitution,” lawyer Anas Tanwir wrote in a tweet.

The court was answering three key questions on the controversy namely:
1. Whether wearing hijab is an essential religious practice in Islamic faith protected under Article 25?
2. Whether prescription of school uniform is violative of rights
3. Whether government order on February 5 was issued without application of mind and manifestly arbitrary?


A three judge bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi delivered their verdict on the ongoing hijab controversy at 10.30 am today.


Ahead of the hijab row verdict, Section 144 was imposed in Bangalore and educational institutions remained closed.

Continue Reading

Legal

SC grants bail to Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination convict AG Perarivalan jailed for 32 years

Published

on

By

Radhika Dhawad | New Delhi

Rajiv Gandhi

Rajiv Gandhi

The Supreme Court, on Wednesday afternoon, granted bail to AG Perarivala, one of the seven convicts in former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi assassination case.


However, the remission of his life imprisonment is pending before the President of India. AG Perarivala was serving life sentence and was jailed for almost 32 years.


As per the SC order, Perarivalan would have to follow the conditions of release and would have to report before the local police officer every month. 

Granting him bail, the court, in its order, said: Since Perarivalan has already undergone sentence for more than 30 years, we are of the considered view that he is entitled to bail in spite of the vehement opposition by the Additional Solicitor General Additional KM Nataraj.
On May 21, 1991, he was accused of purchasing an eight-volt battery used to trigger the belt bomb that killed Gandhi. Perarivalan was arrested when he was 19 and was sentenced to death in May 1999.

Continue Reading

Legal

Supreme Court to allow journalists inside courtrooms for physical hearing of cases

Published

on

By

Karan Pareek | New Delhi


The Supreme Court of India, on Thursday, October 21, resumed hearing of cases and pleas in the physical mode for the first time since March 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic broke out in India.
The Supreme Court has recently issued new SoPs for hybrid hearings as per which all cases on Wednesdays and Thursdays to be heard only in the physical presence of the counsels/parties in courtrooms.
Along with this, SC also decided to allow media persons inside the courtroom during the physical hearings. However, journalists would have to strictly adhere to COVID-19 related norms and protocols.
?With the physical hearing in the Supreme Court of India commencing tomorrow (Thursday, 21 October 2021), it has been decided to allow the media persons, subject to usual COVID restrictions, into the courtrooms for covering the proceedings,” said the top court in a press note.
Supreme Court heard cases through video conference since March last year due to the pandemic and several bar bodies and lawyers demanded that the physical hearings should be resumed immediately.

Continue Reading

Trending

0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x