Supreme Court Criticizes States’ Healthcare Infrastructure, Questions Hospital Regulation Policies

Last Updated on March 5, 2025 by Amit Patra

In a sharp criticism of state healthcare infrastructure, the Supreme Court has highlighted the shocking paucity of public medical infrastructure and healthcare units available for citizens, demonstrating how inefficiencies in the state have inadvertently accelerated the growth of private healthcare centers.

A two-judge bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh gave states a stinging rebuke and noted that the lack of sufficient public healthcare facilities has left private hospitals with no choice but to plug the gaping healthcare gap. The Court particularly mentioned that the states have been unable to prepare proper medical infrastructure commensurate with the nation’s population.

Prioritizing healthcare as an absolute right under Article 21 of the Constitution, the Court also stressed the constitutional obligation of states to ensure medical facilities to citizens. Directive principles of state policy call for untrammeled access to healthcare, a promise increasingly being fulfilled by private health providers.

But the Court also posed a lurking question regarding the danger of over-regulation. Asking whether vigorous policies would discourage private investment in healthcare, the bench asked whether over-intervention could ironically hurt the healthcare system.

The PIL, originally filed against hospitals forcing patients to buy medicines from particular pharmacies, expanded into a comprehensive review of healthcare infrastructure. Finally, the Court asked states to make effective policy choices, weighing patient rights against healthcare viability.

This trailblazing observation is a timely reminder of the fine balance between public duty and private healthcare contribution towards fulfilling India’s intricate medical needs.