{"id":16978,"date":"2026-03-12T11:28:59","date_gmt":"2026-03-12T11:28:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=16978"},"modified":"2026-03-12T11:34:00","modified_gmt":"2026-03-12T11:34:00","slug":"blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/","title":{"rendered":"Blood Donation Ban on Gays, Transgender Persons &amp; Sex Workers Upheld: Centre Defends Policy Before Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"introduction\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Introduction\"><\/span>Introduction<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The issue of blood donation eligibility has once again reached the Supreme Court of India, raising questions about public health policy, equality rights, and the limits of judicial intervention in medical regulations. In a recent development, the Union Government informed the Supreme Court that the existing guidelines disqualifying certain categories\u2014including men who have sex with men (MSM), transgender persons, and sex workers\u2014from donating blood have been retained even after review by expert bodies.<\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_82_2 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Introduction\" >Introduction<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Law_Report_Headnote_SCC_Manupatra_Style\" >Law Report Headnote (SCC \/ Manupatra Style)<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Blood_Donation_Eligibility_%E2%80%93_Exclusion_of_Certain_Categories_%E2%80%93_Challenge_to_National_Blood_Transfusion_Council_Guidelines_%E2%80%93_Policy_Review_by_Expert_Bodies_%E2%80%93_Judicial_Deference_to_Public_Health_Decisions\" >Blood Donation Eligibility \u2013 Exclusion of Certain Categories \u2013 Challenge to National Blood Transfusion Council Guidelines \u2013 Policy Review by Expert Bodies \u2013 Judicial Deference to Public Health Decisions<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Digest_SCC_Manupatra_Format\" >Digest (SCC \/ Manupatra Format)<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Constitution_Of_India_%E2%80%94_Articles_14_15_And_21_%E2%80%94_Public_Health_Regulation_%E2%80%94_Blood_Donation_Eligibility_%E2%80%94_Exclusion_Of_MSM_Transgender_Persons_And_Sex_Workers_%E2%80%94_Validity_Of_Guidelines\" >Constitution Of India \u2014 Articles 14, 15 And 21 \u2014 Public Health Regulation \u2014 Blood Donation Eligibility \u2014 Exclusion Of MSM, Transgender Persons And Sex Workers \u2014 Validity Of Guidelines<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Held\" >Held:<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Observation\" >Observation:<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Legal_Background\" >Legal Background<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Challenged_Exclusion_Categories\" >Challenged Exclusion Categories<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-10\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Centres_Stand_Before_the_Court\" >Centre\u2019s Stand Before the Court<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-11\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#According_to_the_Centre\" >According to the Centre<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-12\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Supreme_Courts_Observations\" >Supreme Court\u2019s Observations<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-13\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Broader_Constitutional_Debate\" >Broader Constitutional Debate<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-14\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Critics_argue_that_blanket_exclusions\" >Critics argue that blanket exclusions<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-15\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Supporters_of_the_restrictions_contend_that\" >Supporters of the restrictions contend that<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-16\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/blood-donation-ban-gays-transgender-sex-workers-supreme-court-india\/#Conclusion\" >Conclusion<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n\n\n\n<p>The Court indicated its reluctance to interfere with the decision, emphasizing that blood safety standards must remain extremely stringent. Observing that even a minimal risk of infection could jeopardize patient safety, the Bench noted that \u201ceven a 1% chance of infection shouldn\u2019t be there.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The case reflects the continuing tension between public health risk management and constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"law-report-headnote-scc-manupatra-style\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Law_Report_Headnote_SCC_Manupatra_Style\"><\/span>Law Report Headnote (SCC \/ Manupatra Style)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"blood-donation-eligibility-exclusion\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Blood_Donation_Eligibility_%E2%80%93_Exclusion_of_Certain_Categories_%E2%80%93_Challenge_to_National_Blood_Transfusion_Council_Guidelines_%E2%80%93_Policy_Review_by_Expert_Bodies_%E2%80%93_Judicial_Deference_to_Public_Health_Decisions\"><\/span>Blood Donation Eligibility \u2013 Exclusion of Certain Categories \u2013 Challenge to National Blood Transfusion Council Guidelines \u2013 Policy Review by Expert Bodies \u2013 Judicial Deference to Public Health Decisions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>The Supreme Court was hearing a challenge to the guidelines issued under the national blood safety framework which categorize certain groups, including men who have sex with men (MSM), transgender persons and sex workers, as ineligible to donate blood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Union Government informed the Court that the matter had been reviewed by expert committees comprising specialists in transfusion medicine and public health. After examining epidemiological data and risks associated with transfusion-transmissible infections such as HIV, Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C, the committees recommended continuation of the existing exclusion categories.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Court observed that blood transfusion systems must ensure the highest level of safety. Judicial interference in technical public health standards should be minimal, particularly when expert bodies have examined the issue. The Bench remarked that even a marginal probability of infection in the blood supply could have serious consequences for recipients.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>While acknowledging the concerns raised regarding equality and stigma, the Court indicated that decisions relating to blood safety protocols involve scientific assessment and risk management best left to medical experts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"digest-scc-manupatra-format\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Digest_SCC_Manupatra_Format\"><\/span>Digest (SCC \/ Manupatra Format)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"constitutional-provisions\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Constitution_Of_India_%E2%80%94_Articles_14_15_And_21_%E2%80%94_Public_Health_Regulation_%E2%80%94_Blood_Donation_Eligibility_%E2%80%94_Exclusion_Of_MSM_Transgender_Persons_And_Sex_Workers_%E2%80%94_Validity_Of_Guidelines\"><\/span>Constitution Of India \u2014 Articles 14, 15 And 21 \u2014 Public Health Regulation \u2014 Blood Donation Eligibility \u2014 Exclusion Of MSM, Transgender Persons And Sex Workers \u2014 Validity Of Guidelines<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"held\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Held\"><\/span>Held:<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Blood transfusion safety involves complex medical and epidemiological considerations which fall within the domain of expert regulatory authorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Courts ordinarily exercise restraint in interfering with technical standards framed on the basis of expert recommendations.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Union Government submitted that the guidelines governing blood donor eligibility had been reviewed by specialized committees under the national blood safety framework.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The expert bodies concluded that existing restrictions should continue in order to minimize risks associated with transfusion-transmissible infections.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Supreme Court observed that the blood supply system must operate under a \u201czero tolerance\u201d approach towards infection risk, noting that even a small possibility of contaminated blood entering the system could endanger patients.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In matters concerning public health and medical safety protocols, judicial review must balance equality concerns with the need to protect recipients of blood transfusions.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"key-observation\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Observation\"><\/span>Observation:<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p>\u201cEven a 1% chance of infection shouldn\u2019t be there.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"legal-background\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Legal_Background\"><\/span>Legal Background<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The controversy originates from guidelines issued under the National Blood Transfusion Council (NBTC) framework governing blood donor selection. These guidelines list certain categories of individuals who are considered high-risk for transfusion-transmitted infections and therefore ineligible to donate blood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"challenged-exclusion-categories\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Challenged_Exclusion_Categories\"><\/span>Challenged Exclusion Categories<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Category<\/th><th>Status Under Guidelines<\/th><th>Reason Cited<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Men Who Have Sex With Men (MSM)<\/td><td>Ineligible To Donate Blood<\/td><td>Higher Epidemiological Risk For Certain Transfusion-Transmitted Infections<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Transgender Persons<\/td><td>Ineligible To Donate Blood<\/td><td>Risk Assessment Under Existing Donor Eligibility Framework<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Sex Workers<\/td><td>Ineligible To Donate Blood<\/td><td>Considered High-Risk Category Under Blood Safety Protocols<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>The exclusion of groups such as men who have sex with men, transgender persons, and sex workers has been challenged on constitutional grounds. Petitioners argue that such blanket bans perpetuate stigma and discrimination and are inconsistent with evolving constitutional jurisprudence recognizing LGBTQ+ rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The challenge draws support from landmark judgments such as the recognition of transgender rights and the decriminalization of consensual same-sex relations, which emphasize dignity, equality and non-discrimination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>However, the government has maintained that blood donation guidelines are based on epidemiological evidence and global transfusion safety standards rather than moral or social judgments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"centres-stand-before-the-court\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Centres_Stand_Before_the_Court\"><\/span>Centre\u2019s Stand Before the Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The Union Government informed the Supreme Court that the issue had already been examined by expert committees comprising specialists in transfusion medicine, infectious diseases, and public health policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"centres-submissions\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"According_to_the_Centre\"><\/span>According to the Centre<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The review considered global medical literature and epidemiological data.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The risk of transfusion-transmitted infections remains higher in certain behavioural risk categories.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Ensuring maximum safety of the blood supply is the primary objective of the policy.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Based on these considerations, the committees recommended continuation of the current eligibility restrictions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"supreme-court-observations\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Supreme_Courts_Observations\"><\/span>Supreme Court\u2019s Observations<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>During the hearing, the Supreme Court signaled caution in intervening in matters involving medical and scientific assessments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Bench observed that blood transfusion systems must adhere to the highest safety standards, since patients receiving blood are often critically ill and vulnerable. Even a minimal lapse could expose them to life-threatening infections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Court therefore noted that the judiciary should be careful before overturning policies framed on the basis of expert medical advice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"broader-constitutional-debate\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Broader_Constitutional_Debate\"><\/span>Broader Constitutional Debate<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The case highlights a significant constitutional dilemma: how to reconcile public health safety with equality rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"critics-arguments\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Critics_argue_that_blanket_exclusions\"><\/span>Critics argue that blanket exclusions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Reinforce stigma against LGBTQ+ individuals and sex workers.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Ignore advances in blood screening technology.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Fail to adopt individualized risk assessment models used in some countries.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"supporters-arguments\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Supporters_of_the_restrictions_contend_that\"><\/span>Supporters of the restrictions contend that<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Blood transfusion safety requires extreme caution.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Epidemiological risk factors remain relevant for policy decisions.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Regulatory authorities must prioritize recipient safety over donor eligibility claims.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>The Supreme Court\u2019s approach suggests that while constitutional principles remain important, public health expertise may carry decisive weight in determining technical safety standards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"conclusion\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Conclusion\"><\/span>Conclusion<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The Supreme Court\u2019s reluctance to interfere with the existing blood donation guidelines underscores a broader principle of judicial restraint in matters involving specialized medical expertise. While the debate surrounding equality and non-discrimination continues, the Court appears inclined to prioritize the integrity and safety of India\u2019s blood transfusion system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The case also reflects the evolving intersection of constitutional rights, scientific evidence, and public health policy. As medical technology advances and societal attitudes evolve, the issue of donor eligibility criteria may continue to invite legal scrutiny and policy reconsideration in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Introduction The issue of blood donation eligibility has once again reached the Supreme Court of India, raising questions about public health policy, equality rights, and the limits of judicial intervention in medical regulations. In a recent development, the Union Government informed the Supreme Court that the existing guidelines disqualifying certain categories\u2014including men who have sex<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":317,"featured_media":16979,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"two_page_speed":[],"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[87,98],"tags":[24,921,5162,5459,28],"class_list":{"0":"post-16978","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-medico-legal","8":"category-third-gender","9":"tag-just-in","10":"tag-medico-legal","11":"tag-supreme-court","12":"tag-third-gender","13":"tag-top-news"},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blood-donation-ban-supreme-court-india.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16978","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/317"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16978"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16978\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/16979"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16978"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16978"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16978"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}