SC gives Delhi 3 weeks to apprise it about steps taken to vaccinate homeless

Additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati informed the Supreme Court about the steps that the Centre has taken for vaccinating the homeless against Covid-19

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday gave the Delhi government three weeks to apprise it about the steps being taken to vaccinate the homeless in the Capital against the coronavirus disease, and to give them medical facilities amid the pandemic.

The Supreme Court of India. (HT Photo)

The direction came in response to lawyer Kush Kalra’s plea after the Delhi government failed to file any response despite a notice being issued to it in July.

Kalra’s plea highlighted the plight of homeless and beggars on the streets, who possibly could not get Covid-19 vaccination for the want of identity documents. It called for the need to provide medical facilities to them.

On July 27, the court first sought responses from the Centre and Delhi government in this regard.

When the matter came up for hearing on Thursday, additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati informed the court about the steps the Centre has taken for vaccination of the homeless. Bhati said the vaccination was being provided even to those without identity documents. She said around 7.7 million first doses have been administered to people without documents.

Bhati informed the court that Delhi has not filed any affidavit. “If a direction can be issued by the court, it will give a perspective of how the roll-out has been in the Capital.”

A bench of justices Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Surya Kant and Vikram Nath agreed to the suggestion. “No affidavit has been filed by the government of the national capital territory of Delhi. The same shall be filed in three weeks.” The court sought the updated status on vaccination by the next date from the Centre.

The court called begging a “human problem” and said there was an immediate need to vaccinate persons who have been forced to stay on the streets.

Kalra’s plea originally sought directions to restrain the homeless from begging on traffic junctions, markets and public places in view of the pandemic. But this prayer was dropped after the court refused to entertain such a prayer. The court agreed to consider the aspect of their rehabilitation.