Telangana HC allows kidney transplant of man to sister with no consent of wife

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court made it clear that there was no need of consent of spouse or parents to donate organs to close relatives. It said such donations did not encompass any commercial elements. The petition was filed by a man who wanted to donate his kidney to his sister.

The court said the woman on whom the kidney transplantation needs to be done is in end-stage of chronic kidney disease and requires renal transplantation urgently. It directed the Apollo Hospitals Authorisation Committee of Transplantation of Human Organs to carry out the kidney transplantation from the man to his sister on Tuesday.

Justice T. Amarnath Goud was dealing with a petition filed by Venkat Naren K. and his sister Madhuri, who urged the court to direct the Apollo Hospital authorities to carry out the kidney transplantation, without insisting on the consent of the spouse of the donor (Venkat Naren) to donate his kidney to his sister (Madhuri).

Madhuri, who is 36-year-old and having a two-and-a-half-year-old baby, has been suffering from severe kidney ailment and is on the final stage of the disease. Unless the kidney transplantation is done, she cannot not survive further, according to doctors.

Responding to his sister’s health condition and keeping in mind the future of his nephew, Venkat agreed to donate his kidney and arrangements were made. But, just 24 hours before the surgery, the Authorisation Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs at Apollo Hospitals refused to proceed with the surgery unless the consent was granted by the wife of Venkat. But, in this case, there are disputes between Venkat and his wife and there is a pending case for divorce. So, Venkat’s wife refused to grant consent.

Explaining the facts to the court, petitioner’s counsel Prabhakar Sripada submitted that there was no scope for commercial dealing in the transplantation. Counsel recalled the Supreme Court findings in Kuldeep Singh v State of Tamil Nadu case, in which it said the objective of the such statute of insisting of consent was crystal clear that it intended to prevent commercial dealings in human organs. “But, if the authorisation committee is convinced of the real purpose of the donor authorising the removal of his organ is by reason of affection or attachment towards the recipient or for any other reason, it does not involve any commercial element and the surgery can be done,” it said.