Kerala High Court reserves order in plea by man questioning efficacy of COVID vaccine, challenging govt imposed restrictions on unvaccinated

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday reserved it order on a plea filed by a person challenging a Government Order (GO) which mandates that people should have a vaccination certificate or a negative RT-PCR test result to visit shops, banks, public offices etc. (Lalu V v. State of Kerala) .Justice PB Suresh Kumar heard the matter elaborately and decided to reserve orders until after he hears related matters on Thursday..He also questioned the petitioners challenge against the GO saying, "How can you find fault with the decision of the State to protect the public?".The Kerala Government had issued a GO on August 4 under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 relaxing COVID-19 restrictions in the State.Clause IV of this GO reads:"Only a person who has taken at least one dose of Covid-19 vaccine before two weeks, or who are in possession of RT-PCR negative certificate taken 72 hours before or who is in possession of Covid-19 positive result more than a month old will be allowed inside (workers/visitors)in shops, markets, banks, public and private offices, financial institutions, factories, factories, industrial establishment, open tourist spaces, and other establishments."The petitioner challenged this particular clause on the ground that it is arbitrary and violative of his right to privacy which is encompassed in the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India..Advocate Ajit Joy, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner has already taken three RT PCR tests to attend duty and it is very difficult to take the test continuously as it costs more than Rs 500 per test. Taking any vaccine, including the COVID-19 vaccine, is purely voluntary and that there is no law in the country which mandates vaccination, he argued.Moreover, the petitioner has the right to choose to not take the vaccine and is ready to bear the consequences of the same if any, he claimed.Joy also pointed out the results of a study conducted on vaccinated persons getting reinfected and confessed that the petitioner has serious doubts regarding the efficacy of the vaccine itself. He argued that the protocol of wearing masks and ensuring physical distancing is applicable to persons even after they are vaccinated, i.e., the protocol appears to be the same for the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. "So why should the petitioner face further restrictions," he asked.Joy concluded that the State is still not convinced that vaccines are efficient which is why they have made it voluntary instead of making a law mandating full vaccination..Justice Kumar indicated that he is doubtful whether the right to not be vaccinated would come under the ambit of Article 21.He decided to reserve its order until he hears other related matters elaborately. He also remarked on the incredulity of the state of affairs at the moment as the other matters he is hearing involves individuals and firms seeking to get the second dose of the vaccine faster than mandated and pleas to even get vaccinated with an additional dose of a different vaccine to facilitate return to countries that only accept persons who have received particular vaccinations. .Recently, a man suffering from severe allergies had also approached the Court challenging the same clause stating that there is no provision to be administered a test dose of the vaccine. The State had then pointed out that the GO doesn't restrict persons from moving outside for essential activities..[COVID-19] Kerala High Court seeks State response on plea against Govt Order restricting unvaccinated persons from entering shops, banks