Right To Health Is Fundamental Even For Murder Accused In Judicial Custody: Delhi High Court
The accused had initially approached the High Court seeking interim bail on medical grounds, contending that he was suffering from neurological issues.
Justice Girish Kathpalia, Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has allowed a murder accused to undergo neurological diagnostic tests after taking note of his serious medical condition, reiterating that the right to proper medical treatment is a fundamental right that continues to operate even during incarceration.
The case arises from allegations that the accused committed murder and subsequently set the victim’s body on fire in an attempt to conceal the identity. He is facing prosecution under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for murder, Section 238(b) of the BNS for tampering with evidence, along with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act relating to illegal possession and misuse of firearms.
A Bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia held, “the accused/applicant, as a human being cannot be deprived of proper medical treatment, more so when he is under detention in judicial custody. Right to health is an integral part of the fundamental right to life and liberty. The applicant as on date is only an accused, not a convict, as allegation of his complicity in the alleged offence is yet to be tested by the trial court. Even the most dreaded criminal and convict has fundamental right to life and liberty, and the same cannot be abrogated without following due process of law.”
Advocate Abhishek Rana appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate Sanjeev Sabharwal appeared for the Respondent.
The accused had initially approached the High Court seeking interim bail on medical grounds, contending that he was suffering from neurological issues and required urgent medical investigation. It was submitted that a CT scan had been scheduled for January 22 and an MRI scan for May 11 at Safdarjung Hospital. However, during the course of hearing, the State pointed out that a Sessions Court order dated October 29, 2025 had already refused an extension of interim medical bail to the accused, and that this fact had not been disclosed in the application filed before the High Court. In view of this objection, counsel for the accused sought permission to withdraw the interim bail application, which was allowed by the Court.
Despite permitting withdrawal of the bail plea, the High Court made it clear that such withdrawal would not prejudice or dilute the accused’s right to receive necessary medical treatment while in custody. The Court took into account a status report submitted by the State before the Sessions Court, which acknowledged that the accused was suffering from neurological concerns serious enough to require further medical examination.
Considering the medical material on record, the Court directed, “Therefore, in the present case, the Medical Superintendent of AIIMS Hospital is directed to carry out CT Brain and MRI Brain of the accused/applicant on priority basis within one week from today.”
The Court added, “The court in such cases has to carry out balancing of interests to ensure that the detained accused person is not deprived of appropriate BAIL APPLICATION 155/2026 Page 3 of 4 pages medical treatment and at the same time, the State and the complainant de facto also do not suffer. ”
To ensure effective implementation of its directions, the High Court instructed the investigating officer to place a copy of the order before the concerned hospital authorities and to forward another copy to the jail superintendent, so that the necessary arrangements for the medical examination are carried out without delay.
Cause Title: Jagarnath Shah @ Lala v. State (NCT of Delhi), [2026:DHC:339]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Abhishek Rana and Vikas
Respondent: Advocates Sanjeev Sabharwal, Vikram Panwar and Vijay
