The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its judgment on a crucial plea related to the Central Government’s insurance coverage scheme for doctors who lost their lives while serving during the COVID-19 pandemic.
A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and R. Mahadevan, while hearing the case, made significant remarks on the moral and constitutional duty of the State to protect and honour the country’s medical professionals who stood on the frontlines during one of the most challenging times in India’s history.
“Society will not forgive us if we don't take care of our doctors,” observed Justice Narasimha, underscoring that doctors who continued to serve patients beyond their official duties were the true lifeline of the nation during the pandemic.
The court was considering issues of eligibility under the government’s insurance scheme — particularly for doctors who were not formally on government duty but continued treating patients privately or voluntarily. Reports by Live Law and Bar & Bench noted that the Bench emphasized compassion and fairness over technicalities, observing that the distinction between government and private service “cannot determine compassion or justice.”
Addressing Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, who appeared for the Centre, Justice Narasimha said the government must ensure that insurance companies fulfil their obligations towards eligible families. “You should compel the insurance company to pay if the condition is met that they were on COVID response and died because of COVID. Merely because they were not on government duty, the assumption that they were making profits and sitting idle is not correct,” he said.
The Bench clarified that it would not decide individual claims but would instead establish guiding principles to ensure the uniform and fair implementation of the insurance scheme. “We will not go into individual claims. We will just lay down the principles,” Justice Narasimha stated, explaining that the focus would remain on whether the deceased doctor was actively engaged in medical service and whether the death occurred due to COVID-19 infection.
The judges added that credible evidence must show the doctor continued to serve patients — even by keeping clinics open voluntarily — and that the death was linked to infection from the virus. “Once these two questions are satisfied, it is not for us to question whether the doctor opened his clinic or offered his services for COVID alone,” Justice Narasimha further clarified.
During the hearing, the Bench directed the Centre to provide comprehensive data on all similar or parallel insurance schemes apart from the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Package Insurance Scheme for Health Workers Fighting COVID-19.
“Give us the data and information about other parallel schemes. We will lay down the principle, and on that basis, claims can be made to the insurance company,” the Bench said.
The case originated from a petition before the Bombay High Court, filed by a woman whose husband — a doctor — died after being directed by the State to keep his dispensary open during the pandemic. Recognising the broader implications, the Supreme Court subsequently allowed other petitioners from across India to join the proceedings.
Concluding the hearing, Justice Narasimha delivered a poignant message, reflecting the court’s commitment to uphold the dignity of medical professionals: “The first profession that protects human life is the doctor. This country wouldn’t forgive us if we don’t stand by doctors and take care of them.”
