The Supreme Court declined a plea seeking mandatory NAT testing in all blood banks.
The case was heard by Justice B. R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih.
The petition was filed by Sarvesham Mangalam Foundation.
The court said medical testing standards must be decided by experts and policymakers.
NAT testing detects viruses like HIV, Hepatitis B, and Hepatitis C earlier than conventional tests.
The test is not mandatory nationwide due to cost and implementation considerations.
The Supreme Court of India declined to entertain a petition seeking directions to make Nucleic Acid Testing (NAT) mandatory in all blood banks across the country, observing that such decisions fall within the domain of medical experts and policymakers.
The matter was heard by a Bench comprising Justice B. R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih. The petition had been filed by Sarvesham Mangalam Foundation, which sought nationwide implementation of NAT screening to enhance blood safety during transfusions.
While hearing the plea, the Bench declined to issue directions and stressed that courts cannot step into the role of medical regulators.
During the hearing, the judges made it clear that the judiciary cannot determine technical medical standards.
The Bench observed that questions related to what medical tests should be conducted in blood banks require scientific evaluation and policy assessment by competent authorities. Such matters, the court said, should be decided by medical experts and health regulators rather than by judicial orders.
On these grounds, the Supreme Court declined to entertain the writ petition seeking mandatory implementation of NAT testing in blood banks across India.
The petition filed by Sarvesham Mangalam Foundation sought directions to the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare as well as States and Union Territories to make NAT testing compulsory in all blood banks.
According to the petitioner, implementing NAT screening nationwide would significantly improve the safety of blood transfusions and reduce the risk of transfusion transmitted infections.
The plea highlighted concerns related to infections that can spread through blood transfusions, including:
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)
Hepatitis B
Hepatitis C
The petitioner also argued that ensuring safe blood transfusions is closely linked to the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, emphasizing that patients have a right to receive infection free blood.
Nucleic Acid Testing is an advanced molecular screening technique used to detect the genetic material of viruses in donated blood.
Unlike conventional serological tests that detect antibodies or antigens, NAT identifies viral DNA or RNA directly. This allows infections to be detected much earlier and reduces the window period between infection and detectability.
Because of its high sensitivity, NAT can detect viruses responsible for serious infections such as HIV, Hepatitis B, and Hepatitis C at an earlier stage.
However, the method is also more expensive than traditional blood screening tests, which is one of the reasons it has not been implemented uniformly across all blood banks in India.
Blood banks in India are already required to screen donated blood for several infections before it is used for transfusions.
These include testing for HIV, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, malaria, and syphilis using standard screening methods. While NAT testing is available in some hospitals and blood banks, it has not been made mandatory nationwide.
The court indicated that decisions about adopting advanced testing technologies involve considerations such as cost, infrastructure, and feasibility. These factors must be evaluated by public health authorities and medical experts.
The case was filed as Writ Petition (Civil) No. 184 of 2026, titled Sarvesham Mangalam Foundation vs Union of India.
Through the petition, the foundation sought judicial intervention to ensure mandatory NAT screening in blood banks to prevent infections transmitted through blood transfusions.
After hearing the matter, the Supreme Court declined to entertain the plea and left the issue to policymakers and healthcare authorities to decide.
Reference:
Hans, Rekha, and Neelam Marwaha. 2014. “Nucleic Acid Testing: Benefits and Constraints.” Asian Journal of Transfusion Science 8 (1): 2–3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3943139/
(Rh/ARC)