The Bombay High Court on Monday extended medical bail granted to 82-year-old Telugu poet P Varavara Rao, an accused in the Elgar Parishad case, till September 25.
A division bench of justices SS Shinde and NJ Jamadar was hearing an application filed by Rao seeking extension of bail granted to him in February on medical grounds and modification of bail conditions to permit him to stay at his home in Hyderabad instead of staying in Mumbai in a rented place.
In February, the HC had granted bail to Rao for six months. He was then directed to stay in Mumbai -- within the jurisdiction of the Special NIA Court.
National Investigation Agency (NIA) has opposed the plea stating that Rao has not shown any major ailment which would necessitate him to take treatment at Hyderabad. The NIA has also said that Rao should surrender since the Taloja Central Prison provides the “best medical facilities”.
Seeking extension of his medical bail, Rao’s application states that during his regular check-ups at the Nanavati Hospital, he has been informed that he is suspected to have neurological problem, known as cluster headache, which needs further examination. Rao had said that he has serious and multiple medical ailments, urinary tract infection with recurrent hyponatremia, suspicion of Parkinsons' disease, lacunar infarcts in six major lobes of the brain and suffering from eye problems.
With such major health problems coupled with old age, given the lack of facilities in Taloja Central Prison it is inevitable that his health would deteriorate and may lead to his death, Rao has said while seeking extension of bail for additional 6 months.
The affidavit filed by NIA SP Vikram Khalate reads: “… the medical reports filed by the applicant does not disclose any major ailment which necessitates him to take treatment at Hyderabad neither it for forms a ground for further extension. Any modification to the condition imposed would directly destroy the basis on which the court passed the order.”
Rao has sought modification of bail condition stating that accessing health services in Mumbai was “difficult and unaffordable”; whereas his hometown, Hyderabad, was much better and patient friendly. Rao has said that a number of his relatives are doctors or in the medical field, hence it would be in the interest of justice if he is allowed to reside in his own home in Hyderabad.
The NIA has said that Rao's request to live at his home in Hyderabad was rejected when he was granted temporary bail, hence he could not raise the same issue in this application.
Opposing Rao’s contention that Hyderabad was financially more viable due to the heavy cost of living in Mumbai, the NIA has said that they cannot expect the courts to pass orders as per their convenience especially when the accused has prima facie committed offence of serious nature. “The economic hardships of living in Mumbai is not a ground to be looked at, at this juncture,” states the affidavit.
Also, the NIA has said that the Maharashtra government had borne the cost of Rao’s treatment at the Nanavati Hospital.
As far as ophthalmologist’s advice of cataract surgery on Rao, the NIA has said that it can be performed in government facilities even while he is in judicial custody.
