Supreme Court Asks Director, AIIMS To Nominate An Expert Panel To Assist The Commission Of Inquiry Constituted To Probe Jayalalithaa's Death

A bench comprising Justices S. Adbul Nazeer and Krishna Murari disposed of a special leave petition filed by Apollo Hospitals ("Apollo") challenging the order of the Madras High Court, which had rejected the plea that the aspirations cast against the Hospital by the CoI would vitiate the enquiry proceedings conducted by it.

Factual Background

The State of Tamil Nadu issued G.O. Ms. No. 817 dated 25.09.2017 and G.O. Ms. No. 829 dated 27.09.2017 to set up a Commission of Inquiry ("CoI") headed by retired Judge of the Madras High Court, Justice Thiru A. Arumugasamy with the mandate to examine the circumstances which led to the hospitalization of the late Chief Minister of the State, Jayalalithaa on 22nd September, 2016 and the nature of treatment Apollo extended to her after hospitalization. Apollo filed two Writ Petitions before the Madras High Court. One petition was filed assailing the proceedings, findings, and recording of evidence before the CoI to the extent that it alleged the the inquiry into the correctness, adequacy and inadequacy of medical treatment provided to Jayalalithaa was in contravention to the provisions of the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952 ("Act") and the Rules thereunder. The other petition was filed seeking the issuance of writ of mandamus to forbear the Commission from causing any inquiry into the correctness, adequacy/inadequacy of medical treatment. In the alternative, Apollo prayed for the setting up of an independent Board with specialised doctors unassociated with the States to look into the matter.

View taken by Madras High Court

The High Court was of the view that the correctness, adequacy and inadequacy of treatment provided by Apollo could be evaluated based on the available medical records. It had refused to interfere with the appointment of CoI and rejected the plea to direct the State to include specialised doctors on the Board to assist the Commission. However, the High Court was of the opinion that Section 5 of the Act provided ample power to the CoI to seek assistance of professionals as and when required, for effective completion of the task. Out of an abundance of caution it was clarified that the CoI was a fact finding body with a specific mandate. It would share its opinion with the Government, which would finally take a call in consonance with the principles of natural justice.

View taken by the Supreme Court

Affirming the view taken by the Madras High Court, the Supreme Court opined that to meet the ends of justice CoI should make the documents, the depositions and the records available to Apollo on an application submitted by it. The Court thought it fit to grant permission to Apollo to file an application to cross examine witnesses, which would be accordingly considered by the CoI. Further, Apollo was permitted to adduce its own evidence. Additionally, the Supreme Court noted that a medical board could be constituted to assist the CoI to facilitate the completion of the task.

[Case Title: M/s. Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu And Ors., Civil Appeal No(s) 7856-7857 of 2021]