Madras High Court Closes PIL After SIT Names 12 Accused
Madurai: The Tamil Nadu government has filed chargesheets in three criminal cases linked to the alleged illegal kidney sale racket in Namakkal district. The development was placed before the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court through a status report submitted by the Special Investigation Team (SIT).
A division bench comprising Justice G. Jayachandran and Justice K. K. Ramakrishnan recorded the submission and subsequently closed the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that had highlighted the issue. The SIT informed the court that 12 individuals have been named as accused in connection with the alleged organ trafficking network.
The PIL was filed by S.N. Sathishwaran from Ramanathapuram district, who raised concerns over a sharp rise in kidney transplant procedures in several hospitals across Tamil Nadu. He questioned whether the surge indicated potential loopholes and misuse in the regulatory framework governing organ transplants.
The petitioner argued that while kidney transplantation remains a life-saving treatment for patients suffering from end-stage renal disease, the increasing number of procedures had triggered fears of illegal organ trade, including allegations of kidney theft and violations of transplant protocols.
He further alleged that Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Medical College and Hospital and Cethar Hospital were involved in serious medical malpractices as part of the alleged racket. The plea also claimed that certain institutions under scrutiny had links to political figures associated with the ruling party.
The case has drawn attention within the medical community, reinforcing the importance of strict compliance with the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, thorough donor screening, and transparent documentation to safeguard ethical transplant practices.
With the High Court taking the SIT’s report on record and closing the PIL, the matter will now proceed through the criminal justice system. The accused individuals will face trial as per due legal process.
For transplant surgeons and healthcare institutions across the state, the case serves as a reminder that beyond clinical expertise, adherence to statutory safeguards, ethical standards, and robust verification mechanisms remains essential to maintain public trust in organ transplantation.
