No Need for Interim Release in a Money Laundering Case as Applicant’s Surgery wasn’t Life-Threatening | HC

Case Detail: Sameer Mahandru v. Directorate of Enforcement - [2024] 160 taxmann.com 670 (HC - Delhi)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Ms Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
• Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. Dhruv Gupta, Anubhav Garg, Ms Yogya Singh, Indhirajith Prabhakaran M. & Aditya Raj, Advs. for the Petitioner.
• Zoheb Hossain, Kartik Sabarwal & Ms Abhipriya Rai, Advs. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the applicant was arrested by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) and subsequently remanded to judicial custody. Since then, the applicant had been in judicial custody, except for the period of his interim bail i.e. from 28-2-2023 to 1-5-2023, from 12-6-2023 to 4-9-2023 and from 5-1-2024 to 17-2-2024 on the ground of medical condition of his wife.

While the applicant was on interim bail, his medical condition had also deteriorated and he had an MRI of his left knee which revealed

“Grade III Tear Posterior Horn of Medial Meniscus with Parameniscal cyst. Grade II Tear MCL. Grade I Changes ACL”.

The applicant’s doctor had advised him to undergo surgery for his left knee namely

“Arthroscopic Medial Meniscal Repair Surgery”.

On 20-12-2023, the applicant filed an interim bail application before the Trial Court seeking interim bail for a period of four weeks.

It was noted that the medical condition of the applicant could not be categorized as a life-threatening situation, and the surgery which was to be undergone by the applicant was not of such nature which necessitates the applicant’s release on interim bail only.

High Court Held

The High Court observed that the applicant could be taken to the concerned hospital to undergo surgery while in custody. Even during the course of arguments, Counsel for the applicant had prayed that in case, interim bail was not granted to the applicant, he be allowed to get his surgery performed while being in custody.

Further, the Counsel for the respondent had stated that he had no objection to this prayer made by the applicant.

The High Court held that since the applicant had surrendered on 17-2-2024, the date which was scheduled for the surgery of the applicant i.e. 26-2-2024 had already passed. Therefore, the applicant could be allowed to undergo the required surgery while being in the custody of the Jail Superintendent. Accordingly, the applicant’s instant bail application was to be rejected.