Right to Life versus AIDS Patients’ Right to Marry The issue of women’s right to life in the context of the AIDS epidemic came to be litigated and debated when in 1998 the Supreme Court restricted the right of an AIDS patient to marry. The judgment came out of a case where a doctor afflicted with AIDS filed a case for compensation against a hospital for violating his right of confidentiality by disclosing his illness. According to the concerned doctor this caused social ostracisation and also broke up his marriage alliance. The petitioner raised the question of the right to privacy. The Supreme Court while deciding the case juxtaposed the right to confidentiality of the afflicted person to the right of information and subsequently the right to life of the prospective bride. From this perspective, the Supreme Court ruled that while a person is afflicted with AIDS his right to marry remains suspended. Subsequently, AIDS unit of a law group filed a review Petition before the Supreme Court. We intervened in this case and submitted arguments grounding women’s social reality that the issue of consent of women within our social reality is a vexed and illusory concept and that the whole AIDS campaign is male-oriented and has not taken gender into consideration. Even though there is presumed gender neutrality, the duties, rights and obligations of the spouses within marriage vary and within this social reality only men can take advantage of such situation. The chances of a woman with AIDS contracting marriage are practically nil in our society. The matter was argued by all concerned parties in the month of December, 2002 and the Supreme Court passed an order stating that there would be no new rights created regarding AIDS patients right to marriage.