Madhya Pradesh High Court
Modu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 July, 2025
Author: Pranay Verma
Bench: Pranay Verma
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19750
1 WP-27218-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
ON THE 29th OF JULY, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 27218 of 2025
MODU
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Nupur Garg - Advocate for the petitioner [P-1].
Raghav Shrivastava appearing on behalf of Advocate General[r-1].
ORDER
1. The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India seeking a direction to release the petitioner to get him proper
treatment for his eye since he is suffering from vision loss.
2. The petitioner was convicted for an offence under Section 302/34
of the IPC and was sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-
vide judgment dated 13.12.1999 passed by Third Additional Sessions Judge,
Dewas in Session Trial No.248/1995. The petitioner had preferred an appeal
against the said judgment before this Court which was dismissed by
judgment dated 22.06.2009 in Criminal Appeal No.1700/1999. Criminal
Appeal No.515/2014 preferred by the petitioner was also dismissed by the
Apex Court by order dated 16.01.2025.
3. It is submitted that during the imprisonment of the petitioner he
has been suffering from loss of vision which has been steadily deteriorating.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19750
2 WP-27218-2025
During the trial the petitioner was given the benefit of bail and he never
misused the liberty granted to him and has always surrendered as and when
directed. He is a 62 years old person and requires to get himself treated at a
private hospital. The respondents/jail authorities are not providing him
sufficient treatment and there is every chance that in the near future he may
suffer from complete loss of vision. He needs to get an eye surgery done at
the earliest.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents/State has raised an objection
that the petition is not maintainable as the petitioner can seek parole under
the law.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is not
entitled for parole/leave under the provisions of Section 31-A & 31-B of the
Prisoners Act, 1900. He referred the provisions of Section 31-A wherein it is
provided that a prisoner, who has undergone half of the sentence or two
years whichever is less can apply for leave. Since the petitioner does not
fulfill the requirement of the aforesaid provisions of Section 31-A, he cannot
seek parole/leave under the aforesaid provisions of the Act. The similar
conditions have been provided under Rule 4 of M.P. Prisoner Leave Rules
1989 framed under the said Act.
6. Considering the fact that the petitioner cannot seek leave under the
Prisoners Act and Leave Rules, the petitioner has no any other remedy
except to seek a direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
under his right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of
India.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19750
3 WP-27218-2025
7. By order dated 18.07.2025 the counsel for the State was directed
to obtain the medical report as regards the medical condition of the
petitioner. The learned counsel on instructions has stated that the petitioner
has been initially treated in the jail itself and is required to be taken to the
District hospital at District Ujjain but due to non-availability of staff he
cannot be taken over there presently. From the same it is evident that the
petitioner is suffering from ailment as stated by him and requires treatment
for the same.
8. In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is allowed. The
petitioner be released temporarily for a period of two months from the date
of his release for treatment upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.
9. The petitioner shall surrender before the concerned trial Court
immediately after expiration of two months. In case if he fails to surrender on
the expiration of two months from the date of release, the concerned trial
Court shall take necessary steps to arrest the petitioner in accordance with
the law.
10. With the aforesaid direction, the petition stands allowed and
disposed off.
(PRANAY VERMA)
JUDGE
ns
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19750
4 WP-27218-2025
