Hemant vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Anand And ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 7680 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Hemant vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Anand And ... on 8 April, 2025

Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla

Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:9582




                                                                1                               WP-29813-2023
                              IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT INDORE
                                                          BEFORE
                                         HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                     ON THE 8 th OF APRIL, 2025
                                                  WRIT PETITION No. 29813 of 2023
                                                    HEMANT
                                                     Versus
                            THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ANAND AND JAIL DEPARTMENT
                                    THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS
                           Appearance:
                                  Shri Ajay Bagadia, Senior Counsel with Shri Siddharth Jain, counsel for

                           the petitioner.
                                  Shri Amit Rawal, G.A. for respondent/State.
                                  Shri Anil Ojha, counsel for the intervenor-Rajkumar Tiwari.

                                                                 ORDER

Heard on I.A.No. 2315/2025 which is application for extension of period of temporary bail for a further period of two months.

The present petition is filed by one Hemant S/o Late Ayodhya Prasad Yadav seeking temporary bail on the ground of medical treatment so as to enable him Re-do Coronary artery bypass grafting CABG from a private hospital which

specialises in the same i.e. Kokilaben Dhirubhai Ambani Hospital and Medical Research Institute or Asian Heart Institute situated in Mumbai since facilities for the said operation are not available in Indore.

3. Facts of the case are that That the petitioner was convicted for an offence U/s. 3097 of the IPC, U/s. 25(1B)(b) and Section 27 of the ArmsAct vide judgment dated 29.02.2000 in the S.T. No. 7/1999. The petitioner had filed an appeal against the said judgment wherein the Court dismissed the said appeal

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:9582

2 WP-29813-2023 bearing Cr.A. NO. 371/2000 vide judgment dated 08.08.2019. A copy of the judgment dated 08.08.2019 is filed herewith and marked as Annexure P/1. The petitioner thereafter filed a special leave petition bearing SLP (Criminal) diary no. 40493/2019. That the said Special Leave Petition was also dismissed vide order dated 01.03.2021. A copy of the order passed in the SLP is filed herewith and marked as Annexure P/2. That during the imprisonment of the petitioner, the petitioner has been diagnosed with blockages in heart and therefore the petitioner was referred to Aurobindo Hospital for treatment on 22.11.2023. The report of the hospital shows diffuse stenosis (90%) in distal segments. A copy of the report of Sri Aurobindo Medical College is filed herewith and marked as Annexure P/3. That the petitioner says and submits that earlier also a corona artery bypass graft (CABG) was conducted on the petitioner on 17.07.2019 and therefore it is the

second instance wherein repeat surgery is suggested to the petitioner. A copy of the case summary of the petitioner of Bombay Hospital is filed herewith and marked as Annexure P/4. That looking to the severity of the case, the petitioner was transferred to Superspeciality hospital, Indore for further treatment, and was under the care of Dr. Sumit Singin Cardio Thoracic and Vascular Surgery department. The consulting doctor in his report has mentioned that the petitioner's case is recurrent ACS post CABG and is a high risk case for re-do CABG and requires urgent re-do CABG and it has also been mentioned that sufficient facilities needed for treatment are not available in the hospital and therefore it is required that the petitioner be referred to a higher centre for further management. A copy of the out patient records is filed herewith and marked as Annexure P/5.

4. Considering the report of Govt. Superspeciality Hospital and the fact that petitioner could not seek leave under the provisions of Section 31-A & 31-B of the Prisoners Act, 1900, he was released temporarily for two months from the date of

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:9582

3 WP-29813-2023 his release upon furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/-. It was observed that immediately after expiry of 2 months he shall surrender before the trial court. The said order was passed on 11.12.2023. The petitioner filed an application for modification of the order dated 11.12.2023 and for extending the period of release on medical ground. Considering that the petitioner had undergone bypass surgery and was advised bed rest, the order dated 11.12.2023 was extended for a further period of two months. Again I.A.No. 2648/2024 was filed for extension of temporary release on medical ground. This Court disposed of the said application considering the medical papers and extended the period of temporary release and directed the petitioner to surrender on 4.06.2024. Again some interlocutory application was filed on the basis of medical documents. The petitioner was directed to appear in MGM College, Indore. Considering the advise of bed rest, the period of temporary release was extended for a further period of 4 weeks by order dated 18.02.2025. Thereafter present I.A.No 2315/2025 has been filed for extension of period of temporary release granted by order dated 18.02.2025 on the ground of medical condition.

5. Learned counsels for the State and the proposed intervenor opposed the application for extension of temporary release on the ground that the petitioner is misusing the temporary bail granted to him on medical ground. It is argued that during the period of temporary release, petitioner abducted the intervenor and in this regard an FIR at crime No 114/2025 has been registered at P.S. Juni Indore. It has also been argued that description of the petitioner in the writ petition and in the Criminal Appeal against the order of conviction is different. In the petition, the petitioner has mentioned name of his father S/o Late Ayodhya Prasad Yadav

whereas in the Appeal against conviction, the name of father of appellant is mentioned as Rameshchandra. They have also argued that petitioner has filed one

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:9582

4 WP-29813-2023

M.Cr.C. for quashment of the criminal case in the form of application under section 482 Cr.P.C. in which the name of the father is mentioned as Rameshchandra. Thus, he is trying to mislead the Court by giving wrong description in the petition and intentionally the name of the father was not mentioned in the medical papers.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that subsequent FIR lodged by the intervenor is a false and concocted case. He vehementally argued that in case if the CCTV footage are directed to be produced before this Court, it would be clear that petitioner was not present at the spot.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is not required to dwelt upon the genuineness of the subsequent FIR lodged at the behest of intervenor since the petitioner has been granted temporary release in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India even after conviction and dismissal of SLP by the Supreme Court only on the ground of medical condition. Upon perusal of various medical reports, it is noted that the petitioner was directed to be examined in the Superspeciality hospital MGM Medical College, Indore and in this regard a report dated 27.01.2025 was submitted to the effect that the petitioner has been advised to avoid extreme of exertional activities Because of subjective nature of complaints of breathlessness, he has been advised Serum NTP Pro BNP to validate heart as a source of his breathlessness. He has also been advised Exercise ECG to corelate if his chest discomfort is related to heart disease. The plan is go for Catheter Coronary Angiography or CT coronary angiography in case TMT is positive or patient is unable to do TMT. He was called for further follow up after 15 days but he never visited the said hospital after 20.01.2025 for follow-up. The said medical report is part of the record.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:9582

5 WP-29813-2023 Thereafter the petitioner has been only filing various medical reports in which name of father of the petitioner has not been mentioned.

8. Considering the aforesaid, this Court finds that subsequent FIR registered at the behest of intervenor is not disputed and there is no follow-up report of the petitioner with MGM Medical College, Indore which makes it clear that the petitioner misused the liberty granted by this Court and therefore, no case is made out for extension of temporary release.

9. I.A.No. 2315/2025 for extension of temporary release is rejected. As a consequence, the petition also stands dismissed. The petitioner shall immediately surrender before the trial court and in case if he does not surrender, the police authority may take necessary steps to arrest the petitioner.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE

MK