Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance After Kerala HC Adjourns Life-Saving Medicines Plea 57 Times
The Supreme Court took suo motu cognisance of delays in a Kerala High Court case after a life-saving medicines plea was adjourned 57 times, raising concerns over access to healthcare under Article 21
The Supreme Court on Friday took suo motu cognisance of the issue of access to life-saving medicines and delays in judicial adjudication of cases involving the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution, after a writ petition before the Kerala High Court was allegedly adjourned 57 times, with the patient dying before the matter could be decided.
A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohan if that is the correct composition in your source) issued notice in the suo motu proceedings and requested the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court to ensure expeditious disposal of the pending writ petition.
"Issue notice... Counsel is permitted to intervene and assist the Court. Meanwhile, we request the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court to ensure that Writ Petition No. 18999 of 2022 pending before that High Court is decided expeditiously," the Bench ordered.
The Court's intervention stemmed from media reports highlighting that the patient's plea seeking access to life-saving medicines remained pending before the Kerala High Court despite being listed repeatedly.
Referring to the report, CJI Surya Kant observed: "The media report says 57 times it has been adjourned."
Appearing for the State of Kerala, counsel submitted that after the new State Government assumed office, the required medicines were imported and supplied to the patient. However, the patient passed away before the legal issues raised in the petition could be adjudicated.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Anand Grover sought permission to intervene, arguing that the case reflected a much larger systemic issue concerning the exorbitant pricing of patented life-saving medicines in India.
Grover submitted that although the Patents Act empowers the Central Government to issue compulsory licences for patented drugs in public interest, the provision has scarcely been invoked.
"This is a huge problem now. Most of the new medicines are patented. They are unaffordable. The government has the power under the Patents Act to compulsorily license. Only one license has been issued from 2005," he submitted.
He urged the Court to expand the scope of the proceedings beyond the individual case to examine structural issues affecting access to affordable medicines nationwide.
The Bench was informed that following the patient's death, the Kerala High Court had converted the matter into a broader suo motu public interest litigation titled In Re: Exorbitant Pricing of Life Saving Patented Medicines, examining the larger issue of access to essential medicines.
Initially expressing reluctance to intervene while the High Court was seized of the matter, CJI Surya Kant observed: "Initially I was reluctant to take suo motu, I thought that let the High Court take a view. But then ultimately it was reported to me that matter is not being decided."
Taking note of the repeated adjournments and continued pendency of the case, the Supreme Court permitted intervention, issued notice on the broader pan-India issue of accessibility and affordability of life-saving medicines, and requested the Kerala High Court to decide the pending writ petition expeditiously.
Case Title: In Re: Access to Life-Saving Medicines and Judicial Expediency in Article 21 Matters
Bench: CJI Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana
Hearing Date: July 17, 2026