Delhi HC refuses to stay HPV vaccination drive, seeks Centre's response
Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to stay the Centre's ongoing Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination campaign, observing that the petition failed to establish sufficient grounds to suspend the programme at this stage. However, the court emphasised that all regulatory and safety procedures must be followed before the vaccine is administered and sought responses from the Centre, the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) and the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR).
The observations came during the hearing of a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the proposed inclusion of the HPV vaccine under the Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP). The petition raised concerns over the vaccine's long-term safety, informed consent and monitoring of adverse events following immunisation.
During the hearing, the High Court observed that public health measures should strictly adhere to established protocols. It noted that vaccines should not be introduced without following the necessary scientific and regulatory procedures, while making it clear that the material placed before the court did not justify stopping the ongoing vaccination drive.
The court directed the Centre, CDSCO and ICMR to file separate replies within four weeks explaining the basis for introducing the HPV vaccine. The matter has been listed for further hearing on 29 October, 2026.
"Half-baked vaccines should not be administered. We are only to ensure that the necessary protocol is followed," said the high court, reports The Times of India.
Besides seeking a review of the vaccine's inclusion under the UIP, the petitioner requested the court to direct the authorities to conduct and publish district-wise and state-wise evaluations before expanding the programme further. The petition also called for stronger mechanisms to ensure informed consent and monitor any adverse events following vaccination.
The PIL questioned the decision to include the HPV vaccine under the Universal Immunisation Programme, citing concerns over long-term safety, informed consent and surveillance of adverse events.
