Dinesh v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 26.05.2026 Dinesh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present :- Mr. Sarun Hans, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vaibhav Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

***** MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking grant of interim bail for a period of 30 days to the petitioner in FIR No.422 dated 01.12.2025 registered under Section 22-C of the NDPS Act at Police Station Sadar Fatehabad, on the ground that the petitioner is required to undergo immediate cataract surgery.

2.

It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is about 48 years of age and is suffering from serious eye ailment, i.e cataract resulting in significantly low vision, due to which he is unable to perform his day-to-day activities properly. It has further been submitted that the petitioner had got his eyes examined from Tibra Eye Hospital, Sikar on 17.11.2025 and the concerned doctor had advised him to

-2undergo immediate cataract surgery, being the only effective treatment for his condition. However, due to his arrest in the present case, he could not undergo the said surgery. It has further been contended that the petitioner was also medically examined at District Civil Hospital, Hisar, where he was again diagnosed with low vision and related complications and due to the said condition, the petitioner is suffering from severe headache, dizziness and visual difficulties.

3.

Learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer for grant of interim bail, has submitted that the petitioner is seeking interim bail on medical grounds by alleging that he is suffering from cataract and low vision and requires surgery from a private hospital. However, the medical documents placed on record only reveal that the petitioner was examined regarding eye-related complaints and cataract and no document has been placed on record to show that the petitioner is suffering from any lifethreatening condition requiring immediate emergency surgery outside jail custody. It has further been submitted that adequate medical facilities are available through the jail authorities as well as Government hospitals. Learned State counsel has further submitted that the petitioner was referred to General Hospital, Hisar on 20.04.2026, 28.04.

2026 and 06.05.2026 for complaints of decreased vision and headache and after examination, appropriate treatment and follow-up were advised.

-3his general condition is hemodynamically stable. Learned State counsel has further submitted that the petitioner had earlier also approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad seeking interim bail, however, the said application was dismissed vide order dated 06.05.2026. It has thus been argued that mere existence of cataract or low vision cannot be made a ground for grant of interim bail, particularly in a case involving commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.

4.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5.

The petitioner is seeking concession of interim bail on medical grounds primarily on the plea that he is suffering from cataract and low vision and requires immediate surgery. However, from the status report as well as the medical report placed on record, it is evident that the petitioner has repeatedly been taken for medical examination and treatment by the jail authorities. The petitioner was referred to General Hospital, Hisar on multiple occasions and his medical examination was duly conducted. As per the medical report submitted by the Medical Officer, Central Jail-2, Hisar, the petitioner has been diagnosed with bilateral posterior subcapsular cataract and at present, his condition is stable and he has no fresh complaint. Thus, it cannot be said that the petitioner is being denied medical treatment while in custody.

6.

At the same time, considering the medical condition of the petitioner, it is directed that in case any urgent need arises or further specialized consultation is required, the jail authorities shall take the petitioner to some eye specialist at Hisar for proper examination and

-4treatment at the expenses of the petitioner, in accordance with law. 7.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any ground to grant concession of interim bail to the petitioner.

8.

Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. 9.

However, nothing observed herein shall be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.

10.

All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) 26.05.2026 JUDGE neetu Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No