Accused gets six-week interim bail for medical treatment after bariatric surgery under PMLA Section 45(1)

Delhi HC granted interim bail for six weeks on medical grounds to an accused in a money laundering case under PMLA Section 45(1). The petitioner underwent bariatric surgery removing 75% of stomach and required strict dietary requirements that could not be adequately provided in jail. Court noted petitioner experienced fever, deranged blood glucose, and blood vomiting episodes. Medical reports from AIIMS and DDU Hospital confirmed specialized treatment and proper diet were essential for recovery. HC applied precedent requiring demonstration that proper treatment cannot be provided in custody, finding jail's partial provision of dietary requirements insufficient for adequate recovery post-surgery.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Entitlement to interim bail on medical grounds under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) read with Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.PC).

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Entitlement to Interim Bail on Medical Grounds:

Medical Status Report:
The Medical Status Report from the Superintendent of Jail highlighted the applicant's severe health conditions, including being an operated case of Bariatric Sleeve Gastrectomy, history of Coronary Artery Disease, Obstructive Sleep Apnoea, Diabetes, Syncope, and Hepatomegaly. The report detailed multiple instances of the applicant's complaints of vomiting, pain, and episodes of blood in vomitus, emphasizing the necessity of a specific diet for recovery.

Initial Court Observations:
The Court, in its order dated 07.06.2024, noted the applicant's severe health conditions and directed the Director of AIIMS to constitute a Medical Board to evaluate the applicant's medical condition. The Jail Superintendent was instructed to provide all medical records to the Medical Board, and the petitioner was to be presented before the Board for evaluation. The Medical Board was to report whether the applicant's ailments required specialized care that could not be provided in the jail.

Medical Board Report:
The Medical Board's report dated 14.06.2024 and subsequent evaluations at DDU Hospital indicated that the applicant's strict dietary requirements post-Bariatric Surgery were critical for his recovery. The report emphasized the necessity of a specific diet comprising complex cereals, protein-rich intake, and avoidance of certain foods, which the jail facilities were unable to adequately provide.

Arguments by Counsel:
The petitioner's counsel argued that the jail was ill-equipped to meet the dietary requirements essential for the applicant's recovery, citing the Medical Board's report and the dietary chart provided by the jail, which was insufficient. The respondent's counsel contended that the petitioner had previously been granted interim bail on medical grounds and could not seek bail repeatedly on the same grounds. They suggested that special dietary requirements could be met through home-cooked food brought to the jail.

Court's Analysis:
The Court acknowledged the severe health conditions of the petitioner and the inadequacy of jail facilities to provide the necessary dietary requirements. It referred to precedents where interim bail was granted on medical grounds when specialized treatment was necessary and could not be provided in jail. The Court emphasized that the health of the petitioner was paramount and that adequate and effective treatment was a fundamental right.

Decision:
The Court concluded that the applicant's medical condition warranted interim bail, as the specialized dietary requirements essential for his recovery could not be met in jail. The Court granted interim bail for six weeks with specific conditions, including furnishing a personal bond, appearing before the court as directed, providing a working mobile number, not leaving the country, not indulging in criminal activity, and not tampering with evidence.

Conclusion:
The application for interim bail on medical grounds was allowed for six weeks, subject to compliance with the specified conditions. The Court emphasized the necessity of providing adequate medical care and dietary requirements for the petitioner's recovery, which could not be adequately met in jail.

---