Bail: Interim bail granted on medical grounds – Respondent was a former minister and accused for offence u/ss.376D/376/511/504/506 r/w s.3/4 of POCSO Act – His bail was rejected – He was admitted for treatment in hospital (K.G.M.U.) and remained admitted from 3.5.2019 to 17.1.2020 – On 9.3.2020, he was again admitted in K.G.M.U. – On 4.6.2020, he was shifted to super specialty hospital (S.G.P.G.I.M.S.) – Medical Board evaluated the condition of respondent and submitted report – On 29.6.2020, respondent was again shifted back to K.G.M.U. – On 3.9.2020, High Court by impugned order allowed the interim bail on medical grounds for a period of two months – Appeal by the State – Held: It is clear that on 3.5.2019, respondent was admitted in K.G.M.U. and was discharged after more than seven months – He was advised taking of tablets, follow up review in Urology OPD and was discharged on his stable condition – The report of Medical Board constituted under the orders of High Court was that there was no major disparity in the treatment of patient from both the hospitals and considering the medical reports, he can continue treatment at jail hospital – Before the High Court, an affidavit was filed by the State bringing on record medical treatment report of S.G.P.G.I.M.S. which stated that the super specialty hospital offer unmatchable and unsurpassable medical expertise in numerous field and patients from far off places come to S.G.P.G.I.M.S. for availing specialised medical treatment – The report of the S.G.P.G.I.M.S., as well as report of the medical board which were brought in the notice of the High Court, were neither considered nor referred to by the High Court in the impugned order – When the respondent was being given treatment in S.G.P.G.I.M.S. as recommended by K.G.M.U., there did not appear to be any shortcomings in the medical treatment offered to respondent, which could have been the basis for grant of interim bail on medical ground – There was no satisfaction recorded by High Court that treatment offered to respondent was not adequate and he required any further treatment by any particular medical institute for which it was necessary to release the respondent on interim bail on medical grounds – Further, as per condition mentioned in interim order, the High Court contemplated that respondent shall ordinarily reside at a place of residence, as assured, far from the place of residence of the prosecutrix and her immediate family, thus, the contemplation was that respondent shall reside at his residence – High Court, without considering the entire materials on record, passed the impugned order which is unsustainable.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.