The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal for reconsideration against its previous judgment, in which it granted over Rs 1.54 crore in compensation to an Air Force veteran who contracted HIV due to the transfusion of contaminated blood at a military hospital. This incident occurred during ‘Operation Parakram’ in 2002, in the region of Jammu and Kashmir.

On September 26, 2023, a panel consisting of justices S. Ravindra Bhat (now retired) and Dipankar Datta emphasized that the essential tenets of dignity, honor, and compassion were notably absent in the respondents’ conduct.

“A profound obligation rests upon all state functionaries, including the upper echelons of the armed forces, to uphold the utmost standards of safety encompassing physical and mental well-being,” the Supreme Court stated.

“While the court endeavored to provide tangible relief, it acknowledged that no monetary compensation could fully rectify the harm inflicted by the respondent’s actions, which shattered the appellant’s dignity, stripped him of his honor, and left him disheartened and disillusioned,” the court articulated in its verdict from September 2023.

The involved parties once again approached the Supreme Court, contesting the September 2023 decision. A bench consisting of justices Dipankar Datta and P. S. Varale, in a ruling on April 3, stated: “Upon review of the petition and the grounds supporting the request for reconsideration of the September 26, 2023 judgment, we find no error, let alone a glaring one, justifying its revision. Furthermore, no other substantial basis for the requested relief was presented in the review petition. Thus, the review petition is dismissed. Any pending applications shall also be resolved,” the bench concluded.

In January this year, the Supreme Court directed the relevant authorities, under the Ministry of Defence, to address a contempt of court case filed by the Air Force veteran for withholding his due compensation.

On September 26, the court held that the Air Force and Indian Army bear vicarious responsibility for medical negligence due to the acceptance of the appellant’s appeal challenging the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s ruling, which dismissed his complaint. The appellant was diagnosed with HIV in 2014 after falling ill.

Medical assessments in 2014 and 2015 determined his disability stemmed from his military service, resulting from a blood transfusion in July 2002. In 2016, he was discharged from service, and his request for an extension of service or issuance of a disability certificate was denied.