State of U.P vs. Gayatri Prasad Prajapati
CITATION: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 686 of 2020 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.4337/2020)
DECIDED ON: 15.10.20
The case is argued between Hon’ble Justice M.R.Shah, Hon’ble Justice and Hon’ble Justice. The facts of the present case is that this appeal is filed questioning the order dated 03.09.2020 passed by Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow, by which the respondent has been granted interim bail on medical grounds for a period of two months while directing listing of the regular Bail Application No. 5743 of 2019 in the week commencing from 28.09.2020.
The learned ASG argued on behalf of appellants argued that the appellant’s medical condition being under control due to treatment given in aforesaid medical institutions, there was no occasion to release the respondent on interim bail. The respondent has been, for the most of the period in last one year, in the hospital alone. The learned ASG submits that under one of the conditions of interim bail, the respondent shall ordinarily reside at a place of residence, which indicates that the respondent is to ordinarily reside at his residence and not for any medical emergency.
The learned council for respondent contends that even if the offence alleged against the respondent is a serious offence and respondent may have political linkage but at present we are not looking at the nature of offence. When a person is ill and he is under prison, he requires a humane treatment. An accused cannot be given a different treatment. The respondent was being moved from one hospital to another hospital, which was not by his own choice.
The Court reasoned that when the respondent was being given treatment in the superspeciality hospital, i.e., S.G.P.G.I.M.S. as recommended by K.G.M.U., we fail to see as to what were the shortcomings in the medical treatment offered to respondent, which could have been the basis for grant of interim bail on medical ground.
The Court held that
“Even as on date, due medical care is being taken of the respondent, which is apparent from the additional documents filed as Annexure A-2 and Annexure A-3 alongwith the application dated 10.10.2020. The High Court, without considering the 15 entire materials on record, has passed the impugned order dated 03.09.2020, which is unsustainable.” (Para 18)
“In result, we allow this appeal, set aside the order dated 03.09.2020. We may again make it clear that observations made by us in this order are only for deciding this appeal and shall have no bearing on the merits of the Bail Application No.5743 of 2019, which is still pending before the High Court for consideration.”(Para 19)
View/Download Judgment:
Kamalini
