Authority: Supreme Court of India (Bench of Hon. J.B. Pardiwala and Hon. R. Mahadevan)

Order Date: 30-07-2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioners: Yash Charitable Trust & Ors.; Respondents: Union of India & Ors.
  • The Court revisited compliance with its earlier judgment dated 30-01-2026 (Writ Petition (Civil) No.369/2022).
  • An affidavit filed by the Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, signed by Director Shri Murari Lal Sharma, addressed only the specific direction in Para 153 of the earlier judgment.
  • Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Additional Solicitor General, was instructed to file a comprehensive compliance report covering all directions of the judgment.
  • The Court granted the Ministry of Health four weeks to submit a detailed status report, outlining actions taken, ongoing implementation plans, and any pending matters.
  • Interlocutory Application (IA) from Respondent No.9, Neurogen Brain and Spine Institute Pvt. Ltd., was noted; the Court directed Ms. Bhati to review the IA and any attached materials, suggesting they may aid implementation, especially if an expert body has been constituted.
  • Senior Counsel Mr. Shyam Divan appeared on behalf of the Parents Forum for Stem Cells in Autism and Cerebral Palsy (Respondent No.13), representing parents of children undergoing stem‑cell therapy. He requested to await the Union’s exhaustive report before proceeding.
  • The Court scheduled consideration of the IA from Respondent No.13 for the next hearing.
  • The matter was adjourned for further hearing on 01-09-2026.

Writ Petition (Civil) No.731/2026

  • Heard on a partial court working day.
  • On 12-06-2026, the Court observed that letters dated 10‑03‑2026, 11‑03‑2026 and the advisory dated 25‑03‑2026 were issued in compliance with the directions of W.P. (C) No.369/2022.
  • The Court reiterated that the directions of W.P. (C) No.369/2022 must continue to be complied with and tagged the petition accordingly.

Reliefs Sought by Society of Regenerative Sciences

  • Quash the impugned Letter dated 10‑03‑2026 (D.O. No. M‑11019/5/2026‑CG) issued by the Department of Health Research.
  • Quash the impugned Letter‑II dated 11‑03‑2026 (File No. M‑No.4) issued by the Department of Health Research through NECRBHR.
  • Quash the impugned Advisory dated 25‑03‑2026 issued by the National Medical Commission.
  • Declare that Autologous Cell Procedures (ACP) performed by Registered Medical Practitioners in a single sitting for their own patients, not for commercialisation, fall outside the purview of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and related regulations.
  • Declare that Respondents No.2, 3 and 4 lack statutory mandate to regulate or prohibit ACP by Registered Medical Practitioners.
  • Direct Respondent No.1 to constitute an expert committee to examine the functioning of Respondents Nos.2‑4 concerning their nexus with private companies manufacturing stem‑cell‑derived products.
  • Set up a court‑appointed expert committee to evaluate scientific publications, granting hearing rights to stakeholders, including patients benefitting from autologous cell procedures and representatives of the petitioner society.
  • Stay the operation, implementation, and enforcement of the impugned letters and advisory, and prohibit any coercive or disciplinary action against Registered Medical Practitioners or members of the petitioner society pending final disposal.
  • Any further orders deemed fit by the Court.

Additional Observations

  • The Court noted that the Medical Council of India had issued advisories in line with the earlier judgment, but the petitioner challenges their legality and relevance.
  • Although the petition was tagged with W.P. (C) No.369/2022, the Court directed the Registry to place the petition before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders.

Final Outcome

  • Ministry of Health granted four weeks to submit a detailed compliance status report on all directions of the 30‑01‑2026 judgment.
  • IA materials from Neurogen Brain and Spine Institute and the Parents Forum will be examined in subsequent hearings.
  • The Court affirmed that letters and advisory issued in March 2026 comply with earlier directions but reiterated the need for full compliance.
  • The Society of Regenerative Sciences’ extensive reliefs were noted; the petition will be escalated to the Chief Justice of India for further orders.

Topics: Compliance Reporting, Stem Cell Regulation, Judicial Review