:

The government does not function from the perspective of a “healthy few” who believes that natural immunity and not vaccines is the “gold standard” to counter the COVID-19 pandemic, the Supreme Court said in a judgment on Friday.

A Bench, without diving deep into the science of the debate behind natural immunity versus vaccination, applied common sense to argue that the government has to bank on immunisation in a country where a sizeable chunk of its population is elderly, sick, anaemic and suffer from co-morbidities which may prove fatal if exposed to the COVID-19 virus.

The court said the government just cannot take chances with lives.

“Surely, the Union of India is justified in centering its vaccination policy around the health of the population at large, with emphasis on insulating the weaker and more vulnerable sections from the risk of severe infection and its consequences, as opposed to basing its decision keeping in mind the interests of a healthy few,” Justice Rao reasoned in the judgment.

Besides, the court reminded that Article 41 of the Constitution mandates the State to make available to the elderly the right to live with dignity and to provide the elderly, ill and disabled with assistance, medical facilities and geriatric care. The government was doing its duty by inoculating the population.

The court said the argument in favour of natural immunity was that of a healthy person. The same standard cannot be applicable to persons with co-morbidities, the sick and elderly people.

According to a National Family Health Survey, 57% women and 25% men in the age group of 15-49 years were anaemic. Among those aged over 15 years, 13.5% women and 15.6% men have high or very high blood sugar level or take medicines to control blood sugar levels. Again 21.3% women and 24% men in the latter age group have hypertension or elevated blood pressure or take medicines to control blood pressure.