How India is bleeding itself dry

Why read this story?

Editor's note: She sits with knees propped against chest, voice hoarse, nose full, eyes kohl-lined and heavy-lidded, her fevered, shawl-draped body struggling against the early February chill. A Delhi-based advocate with the Human Rights Law Network, Sneha Mukherjee has fought 12 major cases on women’s reproductive rights, her most high-profile arguments being in favour of late-term abortions. Two months ago, she represented Ayesha Renna and Ladida Farzana, the most recognizable student protestors in the ongoing movement against the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act. But today, Mukherjee is fighting her rising temperature to talk about blood. On 3 February, the Supreme Court issued notices in response to a public interest litigation case, or PIL, filed by the Association of Rural Surgeons of India. Theirs was a plea to regulate blood banks and revise guidelines created by the National Blood Transfusion Council, which oversees India’s National Blood Policy. Neither ARSI nor Mukherjee, who represents them, expected the matter to even be heard; because India doesn’t have a great set of apex court judges right now, she says wryly. But when the PIL got listed before …