9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 1324 - HC - Money LaunderingGrant of Regular bail - bail sought on medical and humanitarian grounds for a period of 3 months alleging precarious health of the petitioner - whether the petitioner, who is in custody, is entitled to interim bail on medical grounds? - HELD THAT - Article 21 of the Constitution provides for protection of life and personal liberty. The said right cannot be curtailed except according to procedure established by law . The liberty of a person who is accused or convicted of an offence can be curtailed according to procedure established by law. However, right to health is also recognized as an important facet of Article 21 of the Constitution. Merely because a person is an under trial or for that matter even a convict, lodged in jail, this facet of right to life cannot be curtailed. It remains an obligation of the state to provide adequate and effective medical treatment to every person lodged in jail, whether under trial or a convict. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Kewal Krishan Kumar V. Enforcement Directorate, 2023 (3) TMI 746 - DELHI HIGH COURT , referring to the relevant clauses of the Finance Bill introduced on 1st February, 2018 for amending Section 45 of the PMLA, observed that a purposive interpretation of the proviso to section 45(1) shows that it has been incorporated as a lenient provision or to afford 'relaxation' to a sick or infirm person as noted in the Statement of Objects and Reasons to PMLA. The power to grant bail on medical grounds under the first proviso to Section 45(1) of the Act is discretionary, therefore, the same has to be exercised in a judicious manner guided by principles of law after recording satisfaction that necessary circumstances exist warranting exercise of such a discretion. In the absence of an opinion of the experts it is difficult for this Court to come to the conclusion as to whether it is a case for grant of interim bail on the medical grounds. The Court cannot assume the role of an expert and make assessment of its own as regard the medical condition of the petitioner on the basis of medical records placed on the Court file - on humanitarian grounds, the medical condition of the petitioner as articulated in the affidavit of petitioner's wife cannot be simply brushed aside given the fact that there is material on record suggesting that the petitioner is heart patient, as well as having spine related issues, besides other ailments This Court deems it appropriate, to constitute a medical board to evaluate the medical condition of the petitioner - List on 12.06.2023.
Issues Involved:
1. Petition for regular bail. 2. Application for interim bail on medical and humanitarian grounds. Summary of Judgment: 1. Petition for Regular Bail: The petitioner, through his wife/pairokar, sought regular bail in connection with ECIR No. DLZO-I/43/2021. The case is pending before the Court of Ld. Special Judge (PC Act CBI-23), Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi. 2. Application for Interim Bail on Medical and Humanitarian Grounds: The petitioner's wife filed an affidavit dated 22.05.2023 seeking interim bail for three months on medical and humanitarian grounds due to the petitioner's deteriorating health condition. The petitioner, aged 57, suffers from multiple ailments including hypertension, depression, anxiety, obstructive sleep apnea, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and damaged mitral valve prolapse. The affidavit detailed the petitioner's medical history and the lack of adequate treatment in jail. Medical Report and Court's Consideration: The Court requisitioned a medical report from the concerned jail authority, which was received on 26.05.2023. The report confirmed the petitioner's ailments and detailed the medical attention he had received, including referrals to various hospitals for further treatment. Arguments by Petitioner's Counsel: The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner's health condition is precarious and requires urgent diagnostic and possibly surgical intervention, which the jail authorities have failed to provide. The counsel cited various judgments to support the plea for interim bail on medical grounds, emphasizing the petitioner's right to adequate and effective medical treatment under Article 21 of the Constitution. Arguments by Respondent's Counsel: The learned Special Counsel for the Enforcement Directorate contended that the petitioner's ailments are not serious and can be managed in jail. He argued that interim bail on medical grounds should only be granted when the jail authorities cannot provide the requisite medical facilities. He cited several judgments to support the argument that the discretion to grant bail on medical grounds should be exercised sparingly. Court's Observations and Directions: The Court acknowledged the petitioner's right to health as an important facet of Article 21 of the Constitution. It noted that the petitioner had been taken to various hospitals multiple times, but the scheduled diagnostic procedures were significantly delayed, indicating that the Government Hospitals are overburdened. The Court found it necessary to obtain an expert opinion on the urgency of the petitioner's medical needs and whether specialized treatment is required that cannot be provided in jail. Therefore, the Court directed the constitution of a Medical Board at AIIMS to evaluate the petitioner's medical condition and submit a report by 10.06.2023. The report should address the urgency of the required diagnostic procedures, the risk posed by delays, and whether the petitioner's ailments necessitate specialized treatment and care not available in jail. The case was listed for further hearing on 12.06.2023.
|
