"Right To Health Requires Time-Sensitive Medical Infrastructure": Jharkhand HC Issues Directions For Specialised Burn Care Facilities
Saksham Vaishya
6 April 2026 1:35 PM IST
The Jharkhand High Court has held that the right to health under Article 21 is a positive constitutional mandate requiring the State to provide specialised, time-sensitive medical infrastructure, particularly in cases such as burn injuries where immediacy of care is critical. The Court observed that the absence of functional burn care facilities renders the constitutional guarantee of life with dignity illusory.
A division bench of Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar was hearing a public interest litigation arising from a kerosene fire incident in Hazaribagh, which resulted in multiple deaths and severe burn injuries. The petitioner contended that victims admitted to Sadar Hospital were not provided adequate treatment due to a lack of specialised burn units, and that essential medicines were not readily available, forcing families to procure them externally. It was further pointed out that several victims, including women and minors, suffered grievous injuries and permanent disfigurement, exposing systemic deficiencies in emergency healthcare infrastructure.
While certain individual reliefs, such as immediate medical transfer, were held to have become infructuous with the passage of time, and claims for compensation were relegated to appropriate statutory remedies, the Court expanded the scope of the proceedings to address a larger systemic issue of the absence of specialised burn care facilities across the State, remarking that it cannot remain a mute spectator to a state-wide paralysis in specialized medical care.
The Court examined affidavits filed by the State and found inconsistencies and a lack of clarity regarding operational burn units, including a mismatch in data and the absence of essential infrastructure despite prior sanction and funding.
The Court held that the mere existence of buildings or sanctioned units without functional equipment, trained personnel, and proper logistics cannot satisfy the constitutional obligation under Article 21. It emphasised that burn care requires specialised infrastructure, trained manpower, and immediate medical intervention, failing which the right to life stands compromised.
“… 'Right to Health' under Article 21 is a positive mandate that requires the State to provide specialized, time-sensitive medical infrastructure, particularly for burn trauma,” the Court observed.
The Court found that there existed a significant gap between policy formulation and actual implementation of burn care infrastructure in the State. It held that continued reliance on general wards for the treatment of burn victims was inadequate and inconsistent with the constitutional mandate.
Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the petition with comprehensive directions, including mandating the State to make dedicated burn units fully functional in all district hospitals and government medical colleges within 120 days.
Case Title: Onkar Vishwakarma v. State of Jharkhand & Ors. [W.P. (PIL) No. 920 of 2021]