ORDER Anand Byrareddy, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government pleader. 2. The petitioner is the accused in a case involving the murder of one Mahesh Patil. Though the petitioner was granted bail by the Court below it was a conditional bail whereby he was required to surrender before the Court below after three months. However, on medical grounds, the petitioner’s bail was extended by a further period again on a similar condition. It is in this background that the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is suffering from an ailment which has been diagnosed as cancer and is availing treatment in Kumthekar General Hospital and Cancer Research Center, Sholapur and that he requires treatment constantly on a weekly basis. Therefore, the condition imposed by the Court below operates onerously against the petitioner as he cannot repeatedly approach the Court for extension of bail. 4. The learned Government pleader, on the other hand, points out that the involvement of the petitioner is not in much doubt in the commission of the offence. The unfortunate circumstance that he is suffering from a disease does not entitle him to special treatment. The petitioner could very well approach the Court below and seek appropriate relief in the event he does require treatment often. There is no impediment in this regard. The Court below has not refused any such request as is evident from the material produced by the petitioner himself and, therefore, would submit that there is no warrant for interference by this Court. 5. The objection is well taken. The petitioner could very well approach the Court below itself if the petitioner is suffering from a medical condition as is sought to be demonstrated. The Court below would certainly keep in view the health condition of the petitioner and would treat him accordingly. However, since the Court below is in a better position to assess the circumstances as to when and how the petitioner should co-operate with the Investigating Agency and participate at the trial, it would be appropriate that the petitioner approach the trial Court with an appropriate prayer as regards the relief he is seeking. 6. With that observation, the petition stands disposed of.
[ 2012 DIGILAW 420 (KAR) · digilaw.ai ]
Mahadev Basappa Guddodagi v. State of Karnataka — 2012 DIGILAW 420 (KAR) | DigiLaw