Can't Let People Involved In Serious Offences Escape Prison By Pretending To Be Sick: Kerala High Court Explains Scope Of S.480 BNSS
Remarking that Indian jails are well equipped to deal with any casualties to prisoners, the Kerala High Court has observed that a person arrested in serious offences cannot be released on bail merely by claiming to be 'sick' and relying on the first proviso to Section 480(1) of BNSS. Justice P. V. Kunhikrishnan stated that the first proviso to Section 480(1) BNSS is applicable only in cases...
Remarking that Indian jails are well equipped to deal with any casualties to prisoners, the Kerala High Court has observed that a person arrested in serious offences cannot be released on bail merely by claiming to be 'sick' and relying on the first proviso to Section 480(1) of BNSS.
Justice P. V. Kunhikrishnan stated that the first proviso to Section 480(1) BNSS is applicable only in cases where a prison Medical Officer submits a report that the prisoner cannot be given medical treatment within the prison facility. It also noted that bail may be given in cases where the prisoner is nearing the end of his life.
"Our jails are well equipped to face any casualty to any prisoner. Therefore, simply because a person is sick, no court needs to release the petitioner invoking the first proviso to Section 480(1) of BNSS. The first proviso to Section 480(1) of BNSS is applicable in cases in which the Medical Officer attached to the prison concerned, submits a medical report before the court concerned, that the particular prisoner cannot be given medical treatment within their facility. Moreover, in cases in which the prisoner is in a sinking stage where he has to spend his last days with his kith and kin, the court can rely on the first proviso to Section 480(1) of BNSS. In all other cases when a request is submitted for bail on the ground of sickness, the court can allow bail based on that proviso only after getting a report from the Medical Officer of the jail concerned."
For context, Section 480(1) BNSS provides that an accused suspected of committing a non-bailable offence may not be released on bail if there are reasonable grounds for believing he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or life imprisonment or if he has been previously convicted for an offence punishable with death, life imprisonment or imprisonment for seven years or he has been previously convicted on more than 2 occasions for a cognizable offence punishable with 3 years imprisonment. However, the first proviso to Section 480(1) BNSS provides that a person may be released on bail in case of non-bailable offence if such person is such person is a child, or woman or is sick or infirm.
The Court made these observations in the order denying bail to Anand Kumar, the Managing Trustee of the National NGO Confederation and who is alleged to be involved in the CSR Fund scam. The Court had previously also made oral observations about rampant misuse of bail on health grounds.
The petitioner submitted that BNSS gives preference in getting bail if a person is sick. He prayed for bail on the ground that he had a cardiac problem and an angiogram was conducted.
At the outset, the Court remarked "Can a person who is arrested in a serious case be released immediately by the Magistrate, simply because there is a submission that he is having sickness? I am of the considered opinion that the answer is a big 'no'. A person is arrested for the commission of a criminal offence. Our jails are well equipped to protect the prisoners and under trial prisoners."
To strengthen its observations, the Court relied on the instance when former M.L.A. P.C. George who was released on bail by the Magistrate Court in a hate speech case after it was submitted that he was having some health issues. Reportedly, after the release his son Shaun George stated to the media that he was thankful to the complainant because a full body check-up of his father could be conducted because of the arrest. The Court said that this incident should act as a reminder to the judiciary.
The Court further remarked that prisoners camnot "choose a hospital and pick a luxury room" for their treatment. It stated that unless a medical officer of the prison has submitted that the facilities in jail are not sufficient, the prisoner cannot be released under Section 480(1) of BNSS.
“An undertrial prisoner/ convict cannot choose a hospital and pick a luxury room, which is available in all private hospitals for their treatment. Unless the jail authorities state that the medical facility available in jail is not enough for the convicts/ under-trial prisoners, no convict or under-trial prisoner is entitled to bail based on the first proviso to Section 480(1) of BNSS. The person accused of criminal offences should know that they are going to jail and not for medical tourism.”
The Court also noted that there is a procedure mentioned under Rule 488 of Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules, 2014 when an undertrial prisoner is ill. Under the Rules, the Superintendent of the prison has to report if a prisoner has some grave illness and the court can release that person on bail. However, if the Superintendent feels that a prisoner is faking illness, he should send such cases to the consideration of the Medical Board. The Court clarified that this is the procedure to be followed when a prisoner is sick and the court need not release the prisoner mechanically stating that the prisoner is sick.
It further said that the courts should try to send a person to prison and not to hospital during their remand period. The Court held that once a person is produced before the court after arrest, he should be sent to jail in all cases except in cases where that person is completely bedridden.
During hearing of the case, the Court had directed the Director General of Prisons and Correctional Administration, Prison Headquarters to file a statement regarding the treatment facilities in the jails in Kerala. After going through the report, the Court opined that the jails are well-equipped to treat prisoners and under trial.
With respect to the petitioner, it took note of the Public Prosecutor's submissions that he was in jail where medical facilities were available in the jail and necessary follow-up treatments were being given to him. In view of this, the Court was of the view that the petitioner was not entitled to bail based on the first proviso to Section 480(1) of BNSS.
The Court thus dismissed the bail application.
Case No: BA 3680 of 2023
Case Title: K. N. Anand Kumar v State of Kerala and Another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 232
Click Here To Read/ Download Order