Kiran Raj

The Karnataka High Court has taken suo motu cognizance of the increasing number of dengue cases in the state and initiated public interest litigation based on a letter to the editor published in the Deccan Herald. The Court recorded that the rapid spread of dengue, particularly in Bengaluru and surrounding areas, had led to multiple fatalities and required immediate intervention. It stated that the right to health forms part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution and directed the State of Karnataka and the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike to file detailed reports regarding the measures taken to address the outbreak.

The case originated from a letter written by Vijaykumar H.K. of Raichur, published in the Deccan Herald on July 9, 2024. The letter highlighted the increasing dengue cases and urged the Karnataka government to take immediate steps to curb the spread of the disease. It stated that mosquito control measures, improved hospital preparedness, and public awareness campaigns were necessary to address the situation.

The Court recorded that media reports, including those from The Times of India and The Hindu, confirmed a rise in dengue infections. It observed that as of July 2024, over 7,000 dengue cases had been reported, with at least seven confirmed deaths. It further recorded that the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike had acknowledged gaps in mosquito control and surveillance measures. The Court stated, "The alarming increase in dengue cases, as reported in multiple sources, necessitates the Court’s attention. The right to health is an essential component of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The failure of public authorities to address this crisis effectively would be a serious violation of fundamental rights."

The Court recorded that dengue is a mosquito-borne viral infection that spreads in conditions of water stagnation and ineffective waste management. It stated, "The unchecked proliferation of mosquito breeding grounds, combined with insufficient public awareness measures, has contributed to the crisis. Authorities must ensure a structured and sustained response to prevent further escalation."

The Court further recorded that the State of Karnataka and the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike have a constitutional obligation to ensure public health and disease prevention. It stated, "The duty of the state is not limited to providing medical treatment but extends to preventing outbreaks through effective vector control measures, proper sanitation, and awareness campaigns."

It was observed that the failure to implement timely preventive measures leads to seasonal outbreaks. The Court recorded, "The absence of a year-round preventive strategy leads to a surge in infections during monsoon months. It is imperative that health authorities adopt a proactive rather than reactive approach."

The Court further recorded that dengue has a significant impact on vulnerable populations, including children, the elderly, and individuals with preexisting medical conditions. It stated, "Public health measures should focus on high-risk groups and ensure adequate hospital infrastructure, particularly in rural areas where medical access remains limited."

The Court directed the State of Karnataka and the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike to submit affidavits detailing the steps undertaken to address the dengue outbreak. It ordered that reports be submitted within two weeks, specifying the measures taken for mosquito control, medical preparedness, and public awareness. The Court stated, "The respondents shall furnish a comprehensive report on the availability of medical facilities, preventive strategies implemented, and the status of public health interventions in both urban and rural areas."

It further directed that all government hospitals and primary health centers be equipped with adequate resources to treat dengue patients. The Court recorded, "The respondents shall ensure that hospitals are stocked with necessary medicines, testing kits, and trained personnel to manage dengue cases efficiently."

The Court also ordered local authorities to conduct large-scale awareness campaigns on mosquito breeding prevention and protective measures. It stated, "Community participation is integral to dengue prevention. Public outreach programs should include educational drives in schools, residential areas, and public spaces."

Additionally, the Court directed officials to carry out inspections and impose penalties on individuals and organizations failing to comply with dengue prevention guidelines. It recorded, "Failure to prevent water stagnation, improper garbage disposal, and other practices contributing to mosquito breeding shall invite strict penalties. The respondents must ensure that enforcement measures are effectively implemented."

It was further ordered that a transparent reporting system be implemented to monitor dengue cases and the effectiveness of control measures. The Court stated, "Public access to real-time data on dengue cases is essential to ensure transparency and build public confidence in the government’s response."

The Court recorded that environmental conditions, including rainfall patterns and urban expansion, have affected the spread of mosquito-borne diseases. It stated, "Scientific studies indicate that dengue outbreaks have intensified due to climate variations and urbanization. This necessitates a long-term, multi-pronged strategy for disease control."

It was further recorded that Karnataka has experienced repeated public health challenges due to deficiencies in rural healthcare infrastructure. The Court stated, "The present situation highlights the urgent need for improved medical infrastructure and disease surveillance in rural areas, where access to healthcare remains limited."

The Court recorded that suo motu interventions serve as a mechanism to ensure that government agencies remain accountable in matters of public health. It stated, "Judicial oversight in matters of public health is necessary when administrative agencies fail to take adequate preventive measures. The responsibility of the state extends beyond emergency response and includes sustained efforts to ensure disease prevention."

Case Title: High Court of Karnataka v. State of Karnataka and Others
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 18593 of 2024
Bench: Chief Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice K.V. Aravind

[Read/Download order]