Summary
The Court set aside two months’ interim medical bail because the High Court had omitted material medical-board and super-speciality hospital reports. Those reports showed ongoing treatment and controlled conditions, and the High Court had not established inadequacy of the available treatment or a medical need for release. The requirement of humane treatment and proper medical care for prisoners was affirmed; the pending regular bail application remained unaffected.
Issues
- Whether the grant of interim medical bail could stand despite omission of material reports concerning available treatment.
Held
- The High Court failed to consider medical-board and super-speciality hospital reports already before it. Where the recommended specialist treatment was being provided, the order did not identify its shortcomings or record why further treatment required release. Its contemplation of ordinary residence outside custody did not supply that missing justification. (¶¶ 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
- Humane treatment is a legal requirement for every accused, including one facing serious charges. A prisoner suffering illness must receive appropriate treatment and care; the record here showed continuing medical attention. (¶¶ 16, 17, 18)
- The decision concerned only interim medical bail. Its observations were not to affect the merits of the regular bail application pending before the High Court. (¶¶ 8, 19)
Result
State’s appeal allowed. High Court’s order dated 3 September 2020 granting interim medical bail set aside. Pending regular bail application left for independent consideration.