Delhi High Court Rejects Life Convict's Plea Against Tihar Jail Officials' 'Indifference' To His Heart & Kidney Ailments

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed the plea did not disclose any callous indifference or negligence on the part of the Director General of the prison in making the medical facilities available to the Petitioner.

“He has claimed the reimbursement of the expenses incurred by him in his treatment while he was on Furlough or otherwise, but no medical bills of any nature has been placed on record. Moreover, where the facts are disputed or require evidence, the same cannot be considered in the Writ Petition,” the bench said.

Petitioner claimed that during his incarceration, he developed Kidney ailments which came to his knowledge in the year 2011 and Heart ailments in the year 2013, however, the prison authorities paid no attention to him.

Petitioner alleged that the Respondent was well aware that he needed surgery for removal of two stones from his left Kidney. But, negligence in giving him timely treatment resulted in complete failure of his left Kidney.

It was further claimed that Petitioner suffered cardiac arrest in 2013 and was taken to DDU Hospital, where he was given first aid treatment. But, despite having full knowledge of the Petitioner's condition, Doctors at Central Jail Hospital did not send him for Angioplasty.

Consequently, Petitioner claimed, he suffered another Heart Attack in 2014 “solely due to the uncaring and callous attitude of Respondent No.2 towards the convicts” and even then, he was made to leave Jail Hospital without treatment.

Finally, he claimed, in 2017, he underwent Open Heart Surgery at his own expense and sought reimbursement from jail authorities, claiming that his “imprisonment for life sentence has been converted to death imprisonment” by their actions.

The High Court noted that a Status Report was filed by the State disclosing that Petitioner was given medical treatment in different Hospitals. Detailed Medical Reports were also submitted mentioning the details of time to time examination of the Petitioner.

The Court further noted that Open Heart Surgery was got conducted by the Petitioner himself and said, “No directions, as sought by the Petitioner, are merited”.

It however granted liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Appropriate Court, to claim reimbursement of his Medical Bills or Compensation for alleged negligence and indifference.

Appearance: Mr. Kumar Balram, Advocate for Petitioner; Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for State with Mr. Kshitiz Garg, Mr. Ashvini Kumar and Mr. Nitish Dhawan, Advocates for Respondent

Case title: Subhash Chander v. State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 985

Case no.: W.P.(CRL) 1477/2020

Click here to read order