Right To Life Includes Right To Timely Medical Treatment: Chhattisgarh High Court On Prisoner’s Parole Plea For Private Hospital Treatment
68-year-old prisoner had contended that he was suffering from gangrene and had earlier undergone amputation of one toe, and now could face an amputation
The Chhattisgarh High Court has directed the competent authority to decide within ten days a parole application filed by a convicted prisoner suffering from a serious medical condition, observing that the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India includes the right to timely and adequate medical treatment.
The Division Bench was hearing a writ petition filed on behalf of a 68-year-old prisoner currently lodged in Central Jail, Bilaspur. The petitioner contended that he was suffering from gangrene and had earlier undergone amputation of one toe at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Memorial Hospital. According to the medical advice, the infection had further spread and he faced the possibility of amputation of his legs.
Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal observed, “…this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is suffering from a serious medical condition requiring urgent attention. The medical documents placed on record indicate that he has already undergone amputation of a toe and is presently facing the risk of further amputation due to the spread of infection. The right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India encompasses the right to timely and adequate medical treatment. Though parole cannot be claimed as a matter of absolute right, the competent authority is under a statutory obligation to consider and decide the petitioner’s application within a reasonable time, particularly when the same is founded on serious medical grounds”.
Noting that the plea was left undecided by the concerned authorities, the Bench said, “…Such inaction, especially in matters concerning health and life, cannot be countenanced.”.
Advocate Chandrakaditya Pandey appeared for the petitioner and N. K. Jaiswal, Dy. Govt. Advocate appeared for the respondent.
The petitioner sought parole under the Chhattisgarh Prisoner’s Leave Rules, 1989 to undergo treatment in a private hospital of his choice at his own expense, stating that he had lost confidence in the treatment being provided at the government hospital. Although his application had been forwarded by jail authorities to the District Magistrate for consideration, no decision had been taken despite the urgency of his medical condition.
The Counsel for the petitioner argued that the continued pendency of the application amounted to arbitrary inaction and violated the prisoner’s fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, especially when he required urgent medical care.
The State opposed the plea, submitting that parole is not a matter of right and that the application was under consideration by the competent authority. It also stated that the authorities were committed to ensuring necessary medical care to the prisoner within the prison system.
After examining the record, the Court noted that the medical documents indicated a serious health condition requiring urgent attention. The Bench observed that although parole cannot be claimed as an absolute right, the competent authority is under a statutory obligation to consider such applications within a reasonable time, particularly when they are based on serious medical grounds.
Cause Title: Dheluram v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary [Neutral Citation: 2026:CGHC:10989-DB]
Appearances:
Petitioner: Chandrakaditya Pandey, Advocate.
Respondents: N. K. Jaiswal, Dy. Govt. Advocate.