The Delhi High Court on Wednesday granted six weeks interim bail to businessman Amit Katyal on medical grounds.
He has been charge-sheeted in the Land for Job money laundering case along with Rabri Devi and other accused persons.
Katyal sought interim bail on medical grounds. He was earlier also on interim bail for 84 days on medical grounds.
The vacation bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma granted interim bail to Amit Katyal for a period of six weeks.
“In view of the foregoing discussion, this court is inclined to allow the application for interim bail on medical grounds for a period of six weeks from the date of his release from jail, ” Justice Dharmesh Sharma said in the judgement passed on June 26.
The High Court also noted that he was on interim bail earlier and he did not misuse the liberty.
The High Court said that, It would not be out of place to mention that although the chargesheet has since been filed against the applicant accused, the matter is still under investigation qua the co-accused.
“The petitioner was earlier also on interim bail on the medical grounds for about 84 days, and nothing is attributed against him so as to claim that he interfered with or influenced the course of the investigation in any manner,” Justice Sharma observed.
While granting bail to Katyal, the High Court also considered the medical record and the question of whether there are grounds to assume that the medical condition of the petitioner is such that adequate care facilities cannot be provided in Jail?
The High Court said, “The crux of the matter, as was earlier noted by the learned Single Judge (Vacation Judge) in order of June 7, 2024, is whether there are grounds to assume that the medical condition of the petitioner is such that adequate care facilities cannot be provided in Jail?”
“The bench observed, On a conspectus of the report dated June 14, 2024, by the Medical
Board of the AIIMS as also the treating Doctors at DDU Hospital as per the prescription dated June 21, 2024, besides the medical history of the applicant, the answer should be in the affirmative,” the High Court said.
The bench said that, It is but manifest that the dietary requirements of the applicant are such that they cannot be provided in the jail premises. Considering that the petitioner has undergone surgery on April 9, 2024, post Bariatric Surgery, he needs to be given a proper diet in order to attain adequate physical, mental and psychological well-being for at least a period of 3 to 4 months.
“The level of care, attention, minute-to-minute monitoring and emergency response which the applicant requires, cannot be provided at the jail presently. There is no gainsaying that providing home-cooked food on an everyday basis for a long duration is fraught with several technical hurdles at the jail premises,” the high court said.
Senior advocate Aman Lekhi appeared for the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is suffering from multi morbidities resulting in acute morbid obesity and other side effects post Bariatric Surgery that was conducted pursuant to the order dated February 5, 2024, passed by the Special Judge, which entails removal of 75 per cent of the stomach.
It was vehemently urged that post-Bariatric Surgery, the strict dietary requirements of the petitioner are critical for his survival, Aman Lekhi said.
On the basis of report of the Medical Board, AIIMS of June 14, 2024, it was emphasised that the petitioner has not only lost 14 kgs of weight till date, but has also been suffering from intermittent bouts of blood vomiting, Aman Lekhi said.
Alluding to the report by the Medical Board, the Dietary Opinion envisages that post-surgery which was conducted on April 9, 2024, the patient has to follow a normal dietary pattern envisaging three major meals (breakfast, lunch and dinner); three minor meals (mid-morning, evening snacks and post-dinner); and that he is supposed to avoid certain fruits, Aman Lekhi said.
Zoheb Hossain, Special Counsel, opposed the petition and argued that the petitioner is seeking a review of the earlier order passed by this Court and it cannot be overlooked that interim bail on medical grounds is being sought on the same grounds which have already been agitated in extenso.
It was also pointed out that the petitioner earlier remained on interim bail on medical grounds for almost 84 days and he cannot seek enlargement on bail on medical grounds all the time, Zoheb Hossain said.
(With inputs from ANI)
