Ban On Mobile In Hospitals Ban Impinging Upon The Right Of Free Communication Of Patients: Calcutta HC Asks State...
📵 Ban on Mobile Phones in Hospitals: Calcutta HC on Right of Patients to Free Communication
1. Background
Many hospitals impose blanket bans on mobile phone use within their premises citing concerns over interference with medical equipment or maintaining decorum.
However, such bans often raise questions about patients’ right to communicate freely with their families, friends, or legal advisors.
The Calcutta High Court examined the constitutional validity of such blanket mobile phone bans in hospitals, balancing hospital administration concerns with patients' fundamental rights.
2. Calcutta High Court’s Observations
The Court observed that patients have a constitutional right to free communication, especially given their vulnerable status.
A blanket ban on mobile phones without exceptions or reasonable guidelines violates patients' right to privacy and communication.
The Court emphasized that while hospitals may regulate phone usage to prevent interference with medical equipment, a complete ban is unreasonable and arbitrary.
The State and hospital authorities were asked to formulate clear, balanced policies allowing mobile communication subject to reasonable restrictions.
3. Constitutional and Legal Basis
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression, which includes the right to communicate.
Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which courts have interpreted to include the right to privacy and dignity.
Patients, being in a vulnerable state, must have the right to contact relatives, friends, or legal representatives.
Hospitals can impose reasonable restrictions to protect medical interests but must avoid unreasonable or absolute prohibitions.
4. Relevant Case Law
a) Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer, (2014) 10 SCC 473
Supreme Court reaffirmed right to fair trial and communication with legal counsel, indicating communication rights are fundamental.
b) Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1 (Privacy Judgment)
Held that right to privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21.
Includes informational privacy and freedom of communication.
c) K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2018) 1 SCC 1 (Right to Privacy)
Reiterated that restrictions on communication must be reasonable, fair, and just.
d) Common Cause v. Union of India (2018) 5 SCC 1
Emphasized dignity and rights of patients as integral to the right to life.
Right to communication is part of ensuring dignity and autonomy.
5. Principles Laid Down
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Reasonable Restrictions | Hospitals can regulate but not completely ban phones |
| Right to Communication | Part of freedom of speech and right to privacy |
| Patient Dignity | Communication essential for emotional and legal support |
| Balancing Rights and Safety | Restrictions must balance medical safety and rights |
6. Practical Implications
Hospitals must allow patients to use mobile phones for communication, especially for medical updates or emergencies.
Reasonable rules (e.g., no calls in intensive care areas, limited usage times) may be framed.
Complete bans without exceptions are impermissible.
Hospitals should also educate staff and patients on safe mobile use to avoid interference with equipment.
7. Conclusion
The Calcutta High Court has rightly emphasized that a ban on mobile phones in hospitals cannot impinge on patients' fundamental right to free communication. Reasonable restrictions to protect medical interests are valid, but an absolute ban violates constitutional freedoms under Articles 19 and 21.
RELATED Blog
0 comments