Read Order: Ajij Khan v. State of Haryana

Monika Rahar

Chandigarh, March 8,  2022: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted interim bail of 30 days to an accused-patient for getting his treatment done in a private hospital. 

The Bench of Justice Vikas Bahl referred to the Supreme Court in Jaya Talakshi Chheda v. State of Maharashtra, 2018 (2) RCR (Criminal) 816 wherein it was held that the accused should be given a choice to get his/her treatment done from the private hospital at their own costs, more so, when the accused is averse to get the treatment done from the Government Hospital. 

Prayer in the present petition was for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in an FIR registered under Sections 302, 34, 404 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 25/54/59 of the Arms Act. An alternative prayer was made for releasing the petitioner on interim bail for a period of 30 days on account of his medical condition.

The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the petitioner was only pressing the prayer for an interim bail for a period of 30 days in view of the medical condition of the petitioner and he did not press for grant of regular bail, at this stage. With respect to the interim bail, the counsel referred to the Medical Report of the petitioner to show that the petitioner was complaining about pain during defecation, discharge and bleeding per rectum and was diagnosed with Pilonidal Sinus. It was submitted that the petitioner was given conservative treatment and thereafter he was advised for follow up. On November 11, 2021, also he was diagnosed with Pilonidal Sinus and was referred to another hospital for further treatment where he was advised for admission for getting an operation done but the petitioner refused the same.

The counsel further submitted that the petitioner did not want to get his operation done from the Government Hospital and he wanted to get his treatment from a private hospital as the treatment in the said institute was of very high quality and would permanently resolve the problem which the petitioner was facing. 

The State Counsel submitted that although the Medical Report mentioned that the petitioner was facing difficulty but he was getting treatment from a well qualified and experienced Surgeon of General Hospital, Jhajjar and by following conservative management, he could be treated. 

The Court perused the petitioner’s Medical Report at the outset and reiterated his medical history while observing that the petitioner was suffering from Pilonidal Sinus and was in discomfort. The Court further noted that it was also mentioned in the report that the patient was getting treatment from well qualified and experienced Surgeons of General Hospital, Jhajjar. 

On the right of an accused to get treatment at a medical facility of his/ her own choice, the Court referred to the Apex Court in Jaya Talakshi Chheda’s Case (Supra)

Thus, in this background, the prayer for interim bail was allowed and the petitioner was directed to be released for a period of 30 days for getting the abovesaid treatment done. The said release, the Court held, would be subject to the petitioner furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. The period of 30 days was directed to begin from the date on which the petitioner was to be released. 

0 CommentsClose Comments

Leave a comment