The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, issued a stern warning to Indraprastha Apollo Hospital regarding its obligations to provide free medical treatment to the poor, stating that failure to comply could lead to a takeover by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). The bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh highlighted alleged violations of the hospital’s lease agreement, which mandates significant free healthcare services to economically disadvantaged patients.
The controversy stems from an arrangement wherein Indraprastha Medical Corporation Limited (IMCL), which operates the Apollo Hospital, was granted a symbolic lease of Rs 1 for a 15-acre tract in a prime area of Delhi to run the facility on a ‘no profit and no loss’ basis. Despite this, the court noted that the hospital has evolved into a purely commercial venture, rendering medical services unaffordable for the poor.
During the proceedings, the justices expressed dismay over the hospital’s shift away from its foundational public service commitment. “If we find out that poor people are not provided free treatment, we will hand over the hospital to AIIMS,” Justice Surya Kant remarked, emphasizing the court’s commitment to enforce the lease’s terms strictly.
The Supreme Court’s directive came while disposing of an appeal by IMCL against a 2009 Delhi High Court order, which criticized the hospital for flouting its obligation to provide free treatment to a mandated percentage of its indoor and outdoor patients. The High Court had previously directed Apollo Hospital to reserve one-third of its beds for free treatment of indoor patients and to ensure free services to 40 percent of its outdoor patients.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has requested detailed records from the hospital, including total bed strength and outpatient data for the last five years, to assess compliance with these mandates. The bench also asked the central and Delhi governments to clarify whether the hospital’s lease has been renewed beyond its 2023 expiration.
The matter has been posted for a follow-up hearing in four weeks, during which the hospital administration may present further affidavits. Meanwhile, the court has also instructed the hospital to cooperate fully with any inspection teams and provide all requested documentation to facilitate a thorough review of its operations in relation to its public service obligations.
