2017 (1) TMI 1799 - SC - Indian Laws

Seeking grant of bail - bail sought on medical grounds - no control on urination - HELD THAT - The issue that boils down in respect of the medical condition of the petitioner is that, he has difficulty in urination, emerging out of a condition described as prostatomegaly. The present condition, is not such a serious condition, as would entail the transfer of the petitioner from one jail to another, or to require him to be subjected to any kind of specialized treatment, at some different station. The medical condition of the petitioner has been described as stable, and as such, there is no question of extending him the concession of bail on medical grounds. There are no justification, to interfere with, or modify the order passed by this Court - petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner's claim for modification of bail order on medical grounds.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought modification of a bail order due to medical reasons, supported by medical records showing his inability to perform daily tasks without assistance and instances of incontinence. The petitioner's counsel highlighted reports from prison doctors and AIIMS, New Delhi, indicating various health issues, including prostatomegaly causing urination problems.

2. The court reviewed the initial order which referred the petitioner for medical examination at AIIMS, New Delhi, where a team of doctors found his condition stable. Despite objections to the report and the need for immediate medical attention due to age-related complications, the Additional Solicitor General suggested high-quality treatment at AIIMS, Jodhpur, or the State Ayurvedic Hospital, which the petitioner declined.

3. The petitioner filed for modification, requesting treatment at AIIMS, Delhi, and an Ayurvedic hospital in Delhi, as facilities at AIIMS, Jodhpur, and the State Ayurvedic Hospital in Jodhpur were deemed insufficient for his specialized medical needs. The court noted the lack of essential specialties at AIIMS, Jodhpur, and the basic facilities at the State Ayurvedic Hospital, Jodhpur, as per the petitioner's submissions.

4. The State of Rajasthan opposed the modification, citing the stability of the petitioner's medical condition as per AIIMS reports and the availability of high-standard treatment at Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Hospital in Jodhpur. The court considered the arguments from both sides and concluded that the petitioner's condition, though involving urination difficulties due to prostatomegaly, did not warrant specialized treatment or transfer to another facility.

5. Ultimately, the court found no justification to modify the previous order, dismissing the petition for lack of merit. The judgment emphasized the stability of the petitioner's medical condition and the adequacy of treatment available at the current facility, leading to the denial of the requested modification of the bail order on medical grounds.