Rajasthan government’s well-meaning Right to Health Bill is a rare opportunity to live on the lofty ideals of the healthcare profession and, despite having some apparent loopholes and drawbacks, it should not be lost. The Bill promises to provide the residents of the state the facilities of free check-ups, drugs, diagnostics, and emergency transport and care. But it guarantees much more than that. The Bill enlists 20 rights of patients, which include, among others: right to informed consent, right to seek information regarding diagnosis and treatment, and the right to keep their data confidential and private. Essentially, the Bill puts the obligation of facilitating universal access to affordable healthcare services upon the government. Even in the case where private healthcare facilities provide free emergency care, the Rajasthan government has assured that it will reimburse the amount. It needs no retelling that across the country, out-of-pocket expenditure on healthcare has been breaking the backs of the low- and middle-income families — forcing them to avoid healthcare services as long as possible, and compromise with the quality when it becomes inevitable. The costs of quality health and education — two prominent attributes indispensable to an individual human entity — have shot up exorbitantly, propelling inequality in access. Interestingly, and even duly, the architects of the Right to Health Bill have drawn the inspiration for the legislation under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees right to life and liberty. It is heartening to see that the state is willing to take up the responsibility to facilitate universal access to healthcare. This is in line with Article 38 and Article 47 of the Indian Constitution under Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP), which deal with promoting welfare of people and meeting the nutrition and health requirements of the population, respectively. The endeavour to introduce such a comprehensive legislation is also in conformity with several Supreme Court rulings. Given the scale of problem it seeks to address, it is inevitable for the Bill to have shortcomings and loopholes. Some of those are effective enough to stir a state-wide protest by private healthcare professionals, who would be briefly joined by public healthcare professionals as well, out of solidarity. It is vital to understand the concerns of private healthcare professionals and address the same. The successful enactment and implementation of the Bill will only be possible if the government manages to take the distrustful doctors in confidence. The protesting healthcare professionals, however, are adamant that any deliberation on the bill will be possible only after the Bill is withdrawn. Reportedly, protesting professionals are doubtful of the government’s promise to reimburse the expenses incurred on emergency care of patients. They also apprehend that the Bill will lead to increased bureaucratic interference in the functioning of private hospitals. The experts, too, have raised certain apprehensions regarding the lack of clarity around addressal of shortage of healthcare professionals, stipulated time-frame for framing of rules and other things. The protesting doctors need to admit that a wide societal chasm exists when it comes to having access to quality healthcare services, which needs to be bridged at all costs. Government’s intervention, and not interference, under its Constitutional obligation, is the need of the hour. The private sector, too, must share the responsibility of coordinating with the government, financially and otherwise, in this ideal pursuit. The basic needs of the state’s population cannot be compromised for sectoral interests. A viable, consensus-driven path will have to be found. For that to happen, the protesting doctors should engage in meaningful conversations with the government. The government has a still greater responsibility of gaining the trust of protesting doctors. The Health Department of the state government has issued orders of disciplinary action against the doctors. The Rajasthan Human Rights Commission, too, is contemplating further action against the strike. It must be clarified here that the approach of the government should not be coercive, for it will not just amount to an injustice against the protesting individuals but also make the path of implementation of the legislation bumpier. The government’s initiative in Rajasthan is a golden opportunity, which must be utilised in a positive manner.