Background: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections significantly contribute to global morbidity and mortality. Early diagnosis and effective treatment of HCV can mitigate liver-related deaths and prevent further transmission. While the Immunochromatography (ICT) method is widely utilized for HCV detection, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and nucleic acid testing are considered more reliable diagnostic approaches. This study aimed to evaluate the comparative diagnostic efficacy of ELISA and the rapid ICT method for detecting HCV among patients with suspected viral hepatitis. Materials and Methods: The study included individuals of all ages and sexes referred for HCV screening for surgery or hemodialysis, high-risk groups (frequent transfusion recipients, blood donors, and those with occupational exposure), and healthy blood donors aged 18–60 years, weighing >45 kg, screened for anti-HCV antibodies. Exclusion criteria included those outside the specified age, weight, or risk factors. Blood samples collected from 366 patients and were tested for anti-HCV antibodies using both ICT and ELISA. Results: The overall prevalence of HCV infection was 0.55%. Among 366 patients, 66.66% were male, and the remaining were female. A comparative analysis of ICT and ELISA indicated that ELISA exhibits superior sensitivity and specificity compared to ICT. Conclusion: While rapid diagnostic tests such as ICT are valuable during emergencies, their results should be confirmed using ELISA in tertiary care settings. Minimizing false-negative outcomes is critical for timely treatment initiation and to curb silent transmission. Despite its superior sensitivity, the higher cost and labor-intensive nature of ELISA may limit its routine application in resource-constrained settings with high patient volumes.