New Delhi, March 13: The Union government has defended its policy that bars transgender persons, men having sx with men (MSM), and female sx workers from donating blood, telling the Supreme Court that public health concerns must take priority over individual rights.

On Thursday (March 12, 2026), the Centre informed the court that the restrictions are part of the ‘Guidelines on Blood Donor Selection and Blood Donor Referral, 2017’, issued by the National Blood Transfusion Council and the National AIDS Control Organisation. According to the government, these groups fall under “at risk” populations for infections that can be transmitted through blood transfusions. Blood Donation Eligibility Requirements: Who Can Give Blood? What Are the Rules Before Donating Blood?

Government Says Restrictions Based on Expert Advice

Appearing before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Additional Solicitor General Aishwary Bhati argued that the policy is guided by medical experts and prioritises the safety of blood recipients.

The government told the court that relaxing these guidelines could increase the risk of transmitting infections such as HIV, Hepatitis B, and Hepatitis C through donated blood. The Centre stressed that ensuring safe blood for patients must remain the primary objective of the policy. National Blood Donor Month History and Significance: Understanding the Critical Role of Blood Donors in Healthcare.

Petitioners Call Guidelines Discriminatory

The court was hearing multiple petitions challenging the 2017 guidelines, which permanently defer transgender people, MSM, and female s*x workers from donating blood.

Senior advocate Jayna Kothari, representing the petitioners, argued that the policy discriminates against individuals based on their gender identity and s*xual orientation. She said the guidelines unfairly target identity rather than actual behaviour that could increase infection risk.

Kothari also suggested that advanced screening technologies such as Nucleic Acid Testing (NAT) could better detect viruses like HIV and hepatitis in donated blood, making blanket bans unnecessary.

Court Raises Public Health Concerns

The Supreme Court bench indicated caution in interfering with the policy, noting that many patients rely on free blood transfusions in public hospitals and cannot afford treatment in private healthcare facilities.

The judges observed that even a small risk of infection must be avoided, especially for vulnerable patients. The court said the matter requires detailed examination and agreed to hear the case further at a later date.

Debate Between Rights and Safety

In a previous affidavit submitted in 2023, the Ministry argued that the issue should be viewed through the lens of public health rather than individual rights.

The government stated that the right of patients to receive safe blood transfusions outweighs the right of individuals to donate blood if there is any potential risk of transmitting infections.

The case highlights an ongoing debate between public health safeguards and concerns about discrimination against marginalised communities in blood donation policies.

TruLY Score by LatestLY
Rating:3

TruLY Score 3 – Believable; Needs Further Research | On a Trust Scale of 0-5 this article has scored 3 on LatestLY, this article appears believable but may need additional verification. It is based on reporting from news websites or verified journalists (Bar and Bench), but lacks supporting official confirmation. Readers are advised to treat the information as credible but continue to follow up for updates or confirmations

(The above story first appeared on LatestLY on Mar 13, 2026 12:15 PM IST. For more news and updates on politics, world, sports, entertainment and lifestyle, log on to our website latestly.com).