The Supreme Court has directed the Union government to frame a no-fault compensation policy for individuals who suffered serious adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, holding that families affected during a State-led public health intervention cannot be left without a structured mechanism of redress.
The case arose when several families approached the Court alleging deaths or severe medical complications after COVID-19 vaccination and sought compensation, an independent medical inquiry and stronger monitoring protocols.
Acknowledging the scale of suffering during the pandemic, the Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta observed that the issue raised important constitutional questions relating to the right to life and health under Article 21.
“The Constitution does not conceive of the State as a distant spectator to human suffering, but as an active guardian of welfare and dignity.”
The Bench clarified that it was not examining vaccine efficacy or the regulatory approval process, noting that the safety and approval framework for COVID-19 vaccines had already been upheld earlier in Jacob Puliyel v. Union of India, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 533. However, it held that when the State undertakes a nationwide vaccination programme in the interest of public health, it must also ensure institutional support for those who may suffer rare but serious adverse outcomes.
“Where the State undertakes an intervention of this scale… the right to health under Article 21 would extend to a corresponding obligation of institutional support in cases of grave outcomes.”
The Court noted that forcing affected families to pursue individual claims through civil or consumer litigation would impose a heavy burden, particularly where scientific causation may be difficult to establish.
“To insist upon proof of negligence and fault in each case would impose an onerous burden upon affected families.”
Referring to international practices, the Court observed that several jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, Australia and Japan, operate no-fault vaccine injury compensation schemes, which provide structured relief without requiring victims to prove negligence. The Bench pointed out that India currently lacks a comparable nationwide framework despite conducting one of the largest vaccination drives in the world.
Accordingly, the Court directed the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare to expeditiously formulate and place in the public domain an appropriate no-fault compensation framework for serious adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination. It also directed the government to continue strengthening the existing system for monitoring adverse events following immunisation and to ensure transparency by periodically placing relevant data in the public domain.
At the same time, the Court declined to establish a separate court-appointed expert body, noting that national and state AEFI committees already exist to investigate vaccine-related adverse events.
The Bench clarified that the creation of a compensation framework should not be interpreted as an admission of liability by the government and that affected individuals would remain free to pursue other remedies available under law.
“It is clarified that this judgment shall not preclude any person from pursuing such other remedies as may be available in law. Equally, the formulation of the no-fault framework shall not be construed as an admission of liability or fault on the part of the Union of India or any authority.”
Appearances
Petitioners- Mr. Colin Gonsalves, Sr.Adv. Mr. Manik Gupta, Adv. Mr. Satya Mitra, AOR Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Sudarshan Lamba, AOR
Respondents- Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Ishaan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. Ms. Tanvi Dubey, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Ishaan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Padmesh Mishra, Adv. Mr. Vijay Awana, Adv. Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, ASG Ms.Riddhi Jad, ADv. Ms. Shivika Ma, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, ASG Mr. Ketan Paul, Adv./AOR Ms. Riddhi Jad, Adv Ms. Shivika Mehra, Adv. Mr. G.S. Makker, AOR Mr. S.P. Chaly, Sr. Adv. Ms. Anu B., AOR Mr. Shivam Sharma, Adv. Mr. Bibhuti Krishna, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Shiyas Kr, Adv. Ms. Ria Yadav, Adv. Mr. Prabhu K N, Adv. Mr. Sureshan P., AOR Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR Mrs. Anu K Joy, Adv. Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv. Mr. Santhosh K, Adv. Mr. Adolf Mathew, Adv. Ms. Meenu George, Adv. Mr. Shishir Pinaki, AOR Mr. C. Unnikrishnan, Adv. Mr. Pranav Krishna, AOR Mr. Aljo K. Joseph, AOR, Mr. Rajnish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Mohammed Sadique T.A., AOR Mrs. Devika A.l., Adv. Ms. Monisha Mane Bhangale, Adv. Ms. Bijal Vora, Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Vatsa, Adv. Mr. Udit Bajpai, Adv. Ms. Prachi Dhingra, Adv. Mr. Ayush Raj, Adv. Mr. Pranav Sarthi, AOR Mr. Chandragupta Patil, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.
