New Delhi: More than 90 central and state laws still deny individuals with leprosy access to public services, employment, housing, travel, education, and even elected offices. These references prevent thousands from availing of government employment and welfare benefits—reflecting a discriminatory legacy which the Supreme Court has now asked to be addressed urgently by repealing such provisions.
Despite leprosy being medically curable, the discrimination based on it remains entrenched in India’s legal system in ways that continue to exclude and stigmatise those affected by it.
Over 90 laws across India, both central and state, continue to single out, directly or indirectly,individuals with leprosy. On 30 July, the Supreme Court strongly criticised this continued legal discrimination, calling it “embarrassing”, particularly in cases where leprosy remains a ground for divorce.
Hearing a plea originating from a 2010 Public Interest Litigation (PIL), the court directed all states and Union Territories to urgently identify and repeal outdated and discriminatory provisions related to leprosy.
Justice Surya Kant of the Supreme Court commented, “The most serious… we don’t want to use the word, but how embarrassing it is.” This was in a matter where leprosy was one of the grounds for seeking divorce.
Also Read: Leprosy no longer grounds for divorce, but a long way to go before stigma is removed
Background and context
Leprosy was historically regarded as a highly contagious and incurable disease, resulting in severe legal and social isolation of those affected. A striking example was the now-repealed Indian Lepers Act, 1898, which enabled warrantless arrests and forced segregation.
Even after Multi-Drug Therapy (MDT) was introduced in the 1980s, making leprosy fully curable, the stigma remained entrenched in various laws and administrative rules.
India officially eliminated leprosy as a public health problem in 2005.
In 2015, the Law Commission of India drafted the Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons Affected by Leprosy (EDPAL) Bill which proposed the repeal of discriminatory provisions in eight central laws and outlined safeguards and affirmative actions to protect the rights of persons affected by leprosy. However, the bill remains unpassed.
The Personal Laws (Amendment) Act, 2019 removed leprosy as a ground for divorce in central family laws such as the Hindu Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act.
The Supreme Court has made it clear that the judiciary will not strike down these provisions unilaterally but expects the executive and legislative branches to act comprehensively.
The National Human Rights Commission and all states are expected to submit compliance reports detailing the steps taken toward legal reform in the coming weeks, the Supreme Court said.
How many laws still mention ‘leprosy’
According to submissions before the Supreme Court—including those by the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy and the Federation of Leprosy Organizations (FOLO)—at least 93 laws still contain the term “leprosy”.
The provisions in these laws exclude persons affected by leprosy from employment opportunities, public transport, running for elected office, or access to public spaces. Moreover, many laws don’t name leprosy directly but refer to “infectious” or “contagious” diseases, which have historically included leprosy.
Central laws that still refer to leprosy
Several central legislations continue to include direct or indirect references to exclude people with leprosy.
The Nurses and Midwives Act, 1953, includes a clause that disqualifies individuals affected by leprosy from being members of the nursing council. Specifically, its section 5(C) states that a person is disqualified if they are “of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent Court, a deaf-mute or a leper”.
The Indian Railways Act, 1989 and its rules contain provisions restricting the travel of people with “infectious or contagious diseases”. It mentions that while patients with non-infective leprosy may travel with a medical certificate, restrictions still apply otherwise. Section 56 of the Act allows railway staff to remove or segregate such passengers, and even forfeit their tickets.
The Carriage of Passengers Suffering from Infectious or Contagious Diseases Rules, 1990 provides that passengers with non-infectious leprosy, supported by a doctor’s certificate, are exempt from such restrictions—but they must produce the certificate when asked.
The Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 mandates medical inspection for “infectious” diseases and permission before pilgrims embark.
State-level discriminatory laws
Several state-level laws and rules retain explicit references to discriminate against and exclude people with leprosy.
Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 disqualifies persons with leprosy from enrolment as pleaders or mukhtars (who assist people in legal procedures, primarily in subordinate courts) unless medically certified as cured.
The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 disqualifies persons with leprosy from being trustees.
Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968 bars individuals with leprosy from certain employment, with penal provisions for violations.
In states like Assam, Goa, and Haryana, and the Union Territory of Daman and Diu, laws provide for persons with leprosy to be removed from beggary homes and sent to leprosy asylums.
The Bangalore Metro Railway (Carriage and Ticket) Rules, 2011 and Chennai Metro Railway Rules, 2014 restrict travel by leprosy patients unless certified non-infectious by a doctor.
The Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 prohibits persons with leprosy from being members of the Gaon Panchayat. Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 authorises market officials to prevent individuals with active leprosy from entering or selling goods in the market.
Family Court Rules (Patna High Court), 2000 and Hindu Marriage Rules (Meghalaya), 2013, as well as the Jammu and Kashmir Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1999, continue to list “virulent and incurable leprosy” as valid grounds for divorce.
The Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) Act, 1966 disqualifies individuals with contagious leprosy from holding certain positions, including university authorities and non-teaching staff.
In Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, and Odisha, individuals with leprosy are disqualified from contesting local body elections.
Supreme Court’s directions
The Supreme Court has been seized of the matter since a 2010 PIL filed by Federation of Leprosy Organizations. In May this year, Justices Surya Kant and N.K. Singh directed all states and Union Territories to constitute committees within four weeks to identify laws that continue to contain discriminatory references to leprosy.
On 30 July 30, after reviewing the progress in the matter, the court found that several states had failed to comply. It granted an additional two-week time, emphasising that the process could be expedited through ordinances or special legislative sessions. Justice Kant remarked that such reform would “send a very good signal” and help dismantle entrenched stigma.
(Edited by Ajeet Tiwari)
Also Read: India announced end of leprosy 13 years ago, but 1.3 lakh cases were detected in 2016