Delhi HC denies further interim bail to woman suffering from cancer, directs best treatment
New Delhi: The
Delhi High Court
on Friday refused to grant
interim bail
to a woman accused under the
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act
(NDPS) and is suffering from cancer, noting the submissions of prosecution that her ailment can certainly be taken care of even during her stay in jail. However, the court has directed to provide her best treatment at hospital of her choice at the expense of government.
The High Court said, "... accused, being in
judicial custody
, it is the duty of the State to ensure her well-being and right to good health." Justice Girish Kathpalia rejected
Jyoti
's interim bail plea and directed her to surrender before the jail authorities on June 15.
The High Court considered the submissions that she is a bad character of the area. She has 29 cases against her, out of these 4 are under NDPS Act.
In the present case, 480 grams of heroin were recovered from the accused Jyoti.
"I find substance in submission that the rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act cannot be ignored by the Court," Justice Kathpalia observed.
While dismissing the petition Justice Kathpalia said that the ailment, unfortunately suffered by the applicant is certainly a significant factor but I find substance in the submission of learned Prosecutor that it is not an ailment of temporary kind. The ailment can certainly be taken care of even during her stay in jail.
While dismissing the petition Justice Kathpalia said that the ailment of the applicant is certainly a significant factor but he finds substance in the submission of the prosecutor that it is not an ailment of temporary kind, and which can be taken care of even during her stay in jail.
Justice Girish Kathpalia said, "I am unable to find it a fit case to grant further interim bail to the accused/applicant. The application is dismissed and it is directed that the accused/applicant shall surrender positively on June 15 as already directed."
"It is also specifically directed that the jail authorities shall provide the best possible treatment to the petitioner and if so desired by her, she would be taken in custody to the hospital (s) of her choice and shall be provided with all the prescribed medicines at the cost of the exchequer, since she would be in custody," Justice Kathpalia ordered on June 13.
The High court rejected the submissions by the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) that the accused/applicant cannot be provided medical treatment at the cost of exchequer since she would be taken to government hospitals for appropriate treatment.
Justice Kathpalia said, " I am unable to accept this submission. For, the only response prescribed by law to crime is curtailment of the criminal liberty and when that is done, the prisoner, be it under-trial prisoner or a convict comes in custody of the State."
He further said that Medical treatment is also a matter of faith of the patient in the doctor, which has a vital role in recovery, so if the patient wants to be treated by a particular doctor, her/his right should not be curtailed.
On June 6, the Delhi High court has granted interim bail to accused Jyoti till June 15. She had approached the High court after trial court refused to extend her interim bail on June 4. The High Court had sought a medical status report.
"The applicant is enlarged on interim bail on medical grounds till June 15, subject to the applicant furnishing a personal bond of Rs 1,00,000 with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent/Trial Court," high court ordered on June 4.
Petitioner is an accused in an NDPS Act and was granted interim bail on May 19, 2025 till June 15 on the medical grounds in view of her condition.
Senior advocate Amit Chaddha, counsel for the applicant, submitted that as per the Diagnosis Report of the hospital dated June 2, the applicant, Ms Jyoti, aged 39 years, is suffering from
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia
, an uncommon and rare kind of cancer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
29 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Jammu: 3 shops constructed by drug peddler on govt land razed
At least three shops allegedly constructed by Mohammad Sadiq, a drug peddler, on encroached government land were demolished in a joint operation by Jammu police and civil administration in the Belicharana area on Saturday. Superintendent of police, south, Ajay Sharma, said the operation was initiated after a thorough investigation revealed that the accused had illegally constructed the shops on government land using the proceeds from his drug trafficking activities. Sadiq, also known as Githa, was recently booked under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act in a separate case in the Gandhi Nagar area.
Hindustan Times
44 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
HC junks Punjab woman's bail plea says, females, children being used as drug couriers
The Punjab and Haryana high court has dismissed an anticipatory bail plea from a Mansa woman observing that women and children are being used as couriers by drug traffickers. 'The instances of women and children being used as a carrier and supplier for narcotic drugs is on the rise, especially in the state of Punjab and therefore, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that she is a woman aged about 31 years and has been implicated based on disclosure statements made by co-accused does not find favour with this court,' the bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu said while dismissing bail plea from one Sarabjit Kaur. The petitioner woman had approached the high court apprehending her arrest in a drugs case registered on April 3 under police station Bhikhi in Mansa district. Her plea was that no recovery had been made from her and she has been arraigned as accused based on disclosure statements made by two men, Laddi Singh and Kashmir Singh, from whom recovery of 50 grams of heroin was made. The duo, as per police, had named the woman as the 'supplier' of the drug. 'The possibility of further drug being recovered from the petitioner as and when she is arrested cannot be ruled out,' the court said while dismissing her plea. Earlier on April 25, the trial court in Mansa had dismissed her plea, observing that since she has been nominated in this case for the offence under Section 29 (punishment for abetting the crime) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) Act on the statement of the co-accused, her custodial interrogation is required for having 'effective investigation'. The court also took note of her police record as per which she has 'criminal antecedents', and a trial is underway against her in a case of seizure of 24 bottles of illicit liquor from her possession.
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
DPS Dwarka fee row continues, parents protest at Jantar Mantar & raise 5 demands
'Our children are being punished for the system's failure,' said a parent as hundreds gathered at Jantar Mantar in Delhi on Saturday in protest, amid a row over the fee hike by the Delhi Public School (DPS) Dwarka and alleged discrimination against students whose parents refused to comply. Even as the Delhi High Court in May had ordered reinstatement of 102 students, directing submission of a 50% hiked fee, demonstrators on Saturday alleged that the school had not complied. However, sources in DPS Dwarka said that the students will be reinstated as per the court's order once the hiked fee is paid. 'Parents have been asked to clear dues as per the order,' an official said. But parents have alleged that the school continues to harass them. 'They are not complying with the complete court order, and not refunding the extra amount charged… they are asking more than what the High Court order allowed,' said a parent. Carrying placards and banners, the demonstrators laid out five key demands as the conflict continues: immediate reinstatement of all 32 affected students at DPS Dwarka without conditions; strict enforcement of DoE (Directorate of Education) and court directives; criminal proceedings against school management and security personnel for alleged child harassment; a time-bound review of the school's pending fee proposals or suspension of the responsible DoE officials; and audit reforms, including cancellation of licenses of any chartered accountants found complicit in financial irregularities. Highlighting the emotional and academic distress families have faced, protest groups from over 20 other private schools in the city joined in solidarity, warning that unchecked fee hikes and unfair practices at one institution could set a dangerous precedent across the city. In a statement on Saturday, the group of parents said that they have issued an appeal to the Supreme Court, the Delhi High Court, the GNCTD Directorate of Education, and the Delhi government to ensure that private schools operate within the law and that no child is denied access to education or subjected to harassment over fee disputes. The fee hike dispute in the Capital's schools has been a long-standing issue. Amid widespread demonstrations in the city, the Cabinet on June 10 approved the 'Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Ordinance, 2025'. Under this, private schools must obtain approval before any fee increase, establish three independent panels at the state, district, and school levels to review proposals, and require automatic refunds of any excess fees already collected. This came in the backdrop of the DoE rejecting DPS Dwarka's proposed fee hike for the 2023–24 academic year and directing the school to refund any excess fees collected last May. Parents have alleged that, despite this order, the school again raised fees for the 2024–25 and 2025–26 sessions. DPS Dwarka, for its part, has maintained that it issued show-cause notices to parents as early as December, and that over Rs 1 lakh remained outstanding from around 130 students, resulting in a loss of over Rs 6 crore when some students completed Class XII, an official had earlier told The Indian Express. The school had also previously rejected the parents' claims as 'false and frivolous.' In response, parents of 102 students from the school approached the Delhi High Court, challenging both the unauthorised fee increases and the expulsions that followed. On May 16, the High Court orally indicated its inclination to stay the school's decision to expel 32 students for non-payment of unapproved fees, observing that DPS Dwarka had not followed Rule 35(4) of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, which requires prior notice and an opportunity to show cause. Further clarity came on May 30, when Justice Vikas Mahajan ordered DPS Dwarka to allow 102 affected students to continue attending classes provided their parents paid 50% of the increased portion of their 2024–25 fees, while still settling the regular fee in full. The court affirmed that under Section 17(3) of the Delhi School Education Act, the DoE holds the power to curb arbitrary or profiteering fee hikes. The next hearing is scheduled for August 28. On June 5, the HC – while slamming the school for deploying bouncers to stop students from attending classes – made it clear that if a school seeks to act under Rule 35 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, it must first issue prior communication to the affected students or their guardians, specifying the date on which the action is proposed. The school must also provide a reasonable opportunity to show cause against such action, the order stated. Beyond the fee issue, on Saturday, parents pointed to an April DoE inspection report that documented alleged discriminatory practices at the school. According to the report, some students were confined to the library, barred from classrooms and the canteen, subjected to constant staff surveillance even during restroom visits, and in certain cases physically prevented from entering the premises by hired bouncers. Demonstrators described these measures as inhumane and a serious violation of child rights.
