Are Unvaccinated Persons More Likely To Transmit COVID-19 Virus Than The Vaccinated? Kerala High Court Asks State, Centre

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday inquired with the Centre and the State if the chances of an unvaccinated person transmitting the Covid-19 virus was higher than that of a vaccinated person. 

Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar posed the following question to the State government:

"I have a question. The grievance of the petitioner is that there is no scientific or empirical data to indicate that an unvaccinated person is likely to transmit or be a threat to others. Given such circumstances, he argues that he is no different from a vaccinated person. Is this position correct?"

The Court indicated that if the said argument was true, then the question of whether there are sufficient reasons for the petitioner to undergo an RT-PCR test every three days would become significant. 

It was also suggested that Centre should also have been made a party in the matter. 

The Bench announced that it would pass its order pursuant to receiving clarification regarding the same. 

The question cropped up in a plea moved by a man unwilling to get vaccinated against Covid-19 challenging. He has challenged a Government Order mandating vaccination certificate or RT PCR negative results to visit shops and other establishments in the State.

The petitioner is an employee of the Kerala Tourism Development Corporation (KTDC).

Advocate Ajit Joy appearing for the petitioner submitted that his client had already taken several RT PCR tests to attend duty and that it was very difficult to take the test continuously as it costs more than Rs 500 per test.

The petitioner is unwilling to get vaccinated since he doubts the efficacy of the vaccine since even the vaccinated persons are getting infected and even dying.

According to him, he has been going about his daily life since the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, observing all instructions issued by the Government.

He has diligently worn a mask while outdoors, observed social distancing, followed lockdown restrictions and had always taken adequate precautions including observing the 'stay at home' norm.

The petitioner argued that taking the vaccine is purely voluntarily and that no law in the country mandates taking the vaccine.

It was also submitted that the petitioner is entitled to make a choice to not take a vaccine and that he is willing to bear the consequence of the same.

However, it was argued that such consequences cannot be arbitrary and that his livelihood cannot be compromised.

Case Title: Lalu V v. State of Kerala