Delhi High Court: In an application by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to be shifted to RML hospital for six weeks given his deteriorating health, a Single-Judge-Bench of Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., rejected the same while concurring with the opinion of the Medical Board at RML Hospital that the petitioner can be managed well within the Tihar Jail.
Background:
In the present matter, the petitioner was suffering from serious and life-threatening medical conditions such as Compensated Chronic Liver Disease, Diabetic Kidney Disease, etc. due to which he was admitted to Medharbour Hospital, Gurugram during his time in custody since the medical facility in Tihar Jail was unable to manage his severe condition.
The petitioner was advised to undergo bariatric surgery to be performed as a ‘Life-saving surgery’ due to his morbid obesity. The surgery was performed on 18-08-2023, and he was returned to judicial custody. Thereafter, he preferred an interim bail application and vide order dated 6-9-2023, this Court allowed him to be hospitalized at RML Hospital.
It was contended that the RML hospital has an extensive patient load and faces significant challenges in providing specialized care to each patient which is why even after more than 200 days of hospitalization, there was no improvement, and there had been a serious deterioration in his condition.
Directorate of Enforcement (‘ED’), the respondent, contended that the medical condition of the petitioner was clinically stable as per the medical report of the RML Hospital and that he could be discharged and managed in judicial custody of Tihar Jail.
Analysis and Decision
The Court noted that the medical report that was referred to by the ED was from a board of four doctors from the Department of Endocrinology, Nephrology, Gastroenterology, and Medicine and that the board had clearly stated that the petitioner was clinically stable.
Further, the Court said that the argument of the petitioner that he had not received proper treatment and that his condition had worsened would only be rejected in light of the repeated submission of medical reports by the RML hospital, which mentioned that the condition of the petitioner was stable and he could be discharged from the hospital.
The Court noted that the petitioner had remained out of ‘actual’ judicial custody for about 330 days, and during this time he was also allowed to meet his family members daily. Upon considering the circumstances, the Court directed that the petitioner must be sent back to Tihar jail and that the jail authorities were obliged to ensure that the petitioner gets the required medical support.
Further, the Court directed that a Medical Board must be constituted at AIIMS, New Delhi, which shall examine the petitioner and prepare a detailed report including as to whether the petitioner’s health can be managed in the jail or he needs hospitalization. Therefore, the Court disposed of the present application.
[Amit Arora v. Enforcement Directorate, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 3308, Decided on 06-05-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioner — Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa, Advocate Prabhav Ralli, Advocate Nimisha Jain, Advocate Aditya Shukla, Advocate Kushal Gupta
For Respondent — Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain, Advocate Vivek Gurnani
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
