Blog

Case title: Ashok Kumar Vs. The State N.C.T of  Delhi

Case No.: Bail Appln. 1023/2024

Decided on: 01.04.2024

Quorum: Hon’ble Justice Swarna Kant Sharma.

FACTS OF THE CASE:

The case involves an incident where the complainant, a Senior Resident Doctor, was attacked near Chawla Jewellers in Rajouri Garden, Delhi, on 23.12.2014. Two unidentified persons on a motorcycle snatched her bag while she was traveling to ESI Hospital, causing burns on her right eye, face, and right hand by throwing a chemical-like substance on her. The main conspirator, the applicant/accused, allegedly planned to throw acid on the victim after she rejected his love proposal. The accused was arrested on 25.12.2014 and seeks interim bail for medical treatment due to a serious disease, arguing for treatment at a private hospital.

LEGAL PROVISIONS:

The legal provisions involved in this case are Sections 326A, 392, 394, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). Section 326A deals with causing grievous hurt by use of acid, Section 392 pertains to robbery, Section 394 relates to voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery, and Section 34 deals with acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention. Additionally, the application for interim bail is made under Section 439 and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.).

APPELLANTS CONTENTION:

The appellant, in this case, contended that the accused had a history of being granted interim bail on multiple occasions without misusing the liberty granted. They argued that the accused is suffering from a serious disease of hernia and is in unbearable pain, seeking better medical treatment than what was available at Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital, Delhi. The appellant emphasized the urgent medical situation of the accused, stating that the current treatment at the hospital was unsatisfactory and that the required surgery for hernia could be done at a different hospital.

RESPONDENTS CONTENTION:

The respondent, represented by the State N.C.T of Delhi, argued that the allegations against the accused were serious and grave in nature, involving a planned attack on the victim who rejected the accused’s love proposal. They highlighted that the accused had access to medical facilities at Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital, which is a jail-referred hospital, and had been receiving treatment there. The respondent opposed the bail application on medical grounds, stating that the necessary medical care was available at the current hospital and that the bail application should be dismissed.

COURT ANALYSIS AND JUDGMENT:

The court conducted a thorough analysis of the medical condition of the accused, highlighting his ailment of a small umbilical hernia and the recommended surgery at Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital. It took into account the medical reports indicating the availability of necessary medical facilities at the hospital for the required surgical procedure. Despite the appellant’s preference for treatment at a private hospital, the court emphasized the obligation of government hospitals like DDU Hospital to provide comprehensive medical care, including specialized services, to patients in custody. Consequently, the court dismissed the bail application on medical grounds, affirming that the treatment available at the current hospital was deemed satisfactory and adequate for the accused’s medical needs.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

 

Judgement reviewed by – Ayush Shrivastava

Click here to read the full judgement.