Bombay HC rejects HDIL promoter Rakesh Wadhawan’s plea for bail on health grounds
The Bombay high court on Thursday rejected the application by the Housing Development and Infrastructure Ltd (HDIL) promoter Rakesh Wadhawan, who was arrested in the Punjab and Maharashtra Cooperative Bank Ltd multi-crore fraud case, seeking bail on medical grounds. The court was informed that the dual-chamber pacemaker implantation had been successfully carried out on him at state-run KEM Hospital.
The HC has, however, granted him liberty to approach it for further relief if the facilities required for post-surgery recovery were not available at the hospital.
The single-judge bench of justice Nitin Sambre, which had been hearing the application for bail on medical grounds, was informed that the doctors at the KEM hospital, as well as a private cardiologist consultant, had confirmed that Wadhawan required dual pacemaker implantation due to fluctuations in his heart rate.
After KEM hospital had informed that it did not have the facility to carry out the dual-chamber pacemaker implantation, the court sought to know from the state whether any government hospital had the facility and, if not, whether the state would consider allowing Wadhawan to undergo the same at some private hospital at his own cost.
After the state informed the bench that Sir J J Hospital had the facility for the implantation, Wadhawan’s counsel based on the recommendation of the private consultant for multidisciplinary approach for patient’s recovery had sought shifting Wadhawan to a private hospital for recovery.
On Wednesday additional public prosecutor Prajakta Shinde informed the bench that arrangements were being made to set up a cardiac ICU in KEM Hospital. Shinde further submitted that the claim that the applicent was immunocompromised as he was being treated in a government hospital were unfounded as his situation had become such due to the severe Corona infection which he had suffered.
Shinde had also submitted that already regular I.C.U. was operational at KEM Hospital where applicant could be treated in case of emergency and a Cardiac I.C.U. would be ready in all respects within a period of one week. She further claimed that application should be rejected as applicant was provided the best of the treatment by expert doctors.
After hearing the submissions the court observed in its order, “What is noticed is, best possible treatment at well-known Government/Corporation Hospital is made available to the applicant. There is nothing on record to infer that the applicant is not treated for his ailment. As regards comorbidities are concerned, this court expects that KEM Hospital authorities shall be taking appropriate precaution for the same.”
In light of this observation the court held that the claim put-forth by the applicant that he is immediately required to be released on temporary bail on medical ground is not justified and as his application lacks merit, it is rejected.
The court however permitted Wadhawan to approach the court afresh in case of an emergency.