Shekh Aminuddin v. State (Gnct Of Delhi)

$~14 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 256/2016 SHEKH AMINUDDIN ..... Petitioner Through :

Mr.R.N.Sharma, Advocate.

versus STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through :

Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP.

Insp.Amrit Raj, PS Daya Ganj.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG

O R D E R

% 25.05.2016 1.

Fresh medical report is on record. Additional status report has been filed. Copy given to the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2.

The petitioner seeks interim bail to get himself treated. 3.

Vide order dated 10.03.2016, it was agreed that the petitioner could be treated either at AIIMS or RML Hospital. Superintendant Jail was directed to get the petitioner medically examined in either of the hospitals. It is unclear if any request was made by the petitioner for medical treatment in either of the hospitals. 4.

Petitioner's counsel stated that the order was not complied and the petitioner was not taken to AIIMS or RML Hospital. This plea of the petitioner's counsel cannot be accepted at this stage as no such application was made to inform if there was non-compliance BAIL APPLN. 256/2016

of the order by Superintendent Jail. Nothing is on record to show if the petitioner expressed his willingness to be treated either at AIIMS or RML Hospital.

5.

Since necessary orders have already been passed vide order dated 10.03.2016, no sufficient ground for grant of interim bail. The petitioner will be at liberty to get himself treated at AIIMS or RML Hospital.

In case of non-compliance of the orders, he will be at liberty to approach this Court. The bail application stands disposed of.

6.

Copy of the order be sent to the Superintendent Jail for information.

S.P.GARG, J MAY 25, 2016 / tr BAIL APPLN. 256/2016