Jharkhand High Court
Court On Its Own Motion vs The State Of Jharkhand on 14 June, 2018
Author: Aparesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh, Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (PIL) No. 3730 of 2015
---
Court on its own motion ...Petitioner
vs.-
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Dhullu Mahto ... Respondents
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
---
For the State : Mr. Himanshu Kumar Mehta, A.A.G.
For the Respondent No.2 : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Mr. Vijay Kant Dubey, Advocate Mr. Harshvardhan, Advocate
---
27/14.06.2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent no.2.
2. Learned A.A.G., Mr. Himanshu Kumar Mehta has pressed the supplementary counter affidavit filed on 14th June, 2018 by the Chief Secretary, Jharkhand in compliance of the order dated 25th April, 2018. The complete status of the cases as against the respondent no.2 have been enclosed in the form of a chart contained in the letter No.2405 dated 4th June, 2018. Learned counsel submits that out of 25 cases in which respondent no.2 has been made an accused, 18 of them have been disposed of in the sense that in some of them he has been convicted and in some of them he has been acquitted also. In few cases, final form is awaited while in one case trial is at the stage of defence evidence. This according to learned counsel is the status of the cases registered against the respondent no.2. He further submits by referring to the report contained at Annexure-E being letter dated 26th February, 2018 and a report submitted to the Director-in-Chief Health Services, Jharkhand bearing letter No. 647 (RCH) dated 22nd February, 2018 that the Department has not found any doctor guilty of dereliction of duty in the matter of referring the respondent no.2 for treatment outside jail. He submits that a committee comprising two Medical Officers Dr. Ajit Kumar Prasad and one Dr. U.K. Sinha, State RCH Officers, has after examining the instances of referral on different occasions opined that Proctosigmoiditis is an inflammatory disease of the large intestine which sometimes undergoes Remission and at other time Exacerbation for this 2. condition. Colonoscopy and Biopsy are advised time to time. Therefore, referral to a specialized Hospital by the Medical Board appears to be proper. In that light, no case of dereliction of duty has been found against any doctor. Learned counsel further refers to statement made at paragraph no.10 of the affidavit and submits that as against sanctioned posts of 42 doctors, there are 8 doctors working in various jails on deputation, some of these doctors are on deputation since 2007. The Principal Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare has been requested to take back the services of all the 8 doctors vide letter no.3258 dated 12th June, 2018 and depute other doctors in their place. Learned counsel further points out that the directions contained in the order dated 13th June, 2016 upon the Chief Secretary of the State to formulate a policy for treatment and referral of V.I.P. prisoners-accused have also been complied with. The Standard Operating Procedure has been finalized as contained in memo no.3065 dated 31st May, 2018, Annexure-C to the affidavit made by the Department of Home, Prison and Disaster Management. As such the orders passed by this Court from time to time have been duly carried out and the instant Public Interest Litigation can be disposed of in that light.
3. The Chief Secretary, Jharkhand was required to file an affidavit in terms of the order dated 13.06.2016 on certain observations / directions issued upon him. As per the statements made at para 9 of the instant affidavit, based upon the detailed report of the Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, it is stated that no doctor has been found guilty of dereliction of duty. It further appears from the statement made in the instant affidavit that in compliance of the directions contained in the said order dated 13.06.2016, the standard operating procedure (SOP) has been finalized as contained in memo no.3065 dated 31.05.2018 (Annexure-c) where under a policy has been formulated for treatment and referral of the VIP prisoners / accused. As per the stipulation made there under treatment of prisoners has to be undertaken by the Jail Doctors of the Jail Hospital. In case where the Jail Doctors refers the sick prisoner for treatment outside Jail hospital, the Civil Surgeon concerned would constitute a Medical Board for treatment of the prisoner in the Jail hospital itself. In case the 3. medical board clearly opines that such treatment is not possible in the Jail hospital, the sick prisoner would be referred to the local Sadar Hospital/ Medical Hospital for treatment. The recommendation would clearly state the period of treatment required. The Jail Superintendent shall be required to obtain permission from the Deputy Commissioner in respect of convicted prisoner and from the concerned Court in case of under trial prisoner for treatment in local Sadar Hospital with proper security arrangement. The Jail Superintendent would also make available the weekly report of such prisoner referred for treatment outside Jail to the concerned Court / Deputy Commissioner with a copy to the Inspector General, Prison. The Medical Board constituted by the Civil Surgeon, in cases requiring referral for treatment outside the District, shall have to clearly state that such treatment is not available in the Local Sadar Hospital/ Medical College and the reasons thereof. They would also indicate the time period for such treatment in any hospital outside the State. Based on such recommendation the Jail Superintendent would obtain permission from the Deputy Commissioner / concerned Court and provide adequate security for treatment of such sick prisoners at RIMS Ranchi / any other Medical Hospitals. The Superintendent of RIMS / other Medical Hospitals shall furnish a weekly medical report to the concerned Jail Superintendent for submission before the concerned Court / Deputy Commissioner with copy to the Inspector General, Jharkhand. The SOP further stipulates that in case such Medical Board of RIMS Ranchi considers it necessary for referring the sick prisoner for treatment to AIIMS / any higher institutions, they would indicate clearly the reasons as to why such treatment cannot be made available at RIMS or any other hospital in the State. They would also indicate the clear timeline of such treatment outside the State. The concerned Jail Superintendent in cases where referral has been made for treatment outside the State, shall in terms of the order passed in W.P.(PIL) No. 4700 of 2008 (Durga Oraon Vrs. State of Jharkhand & others ) and other analogous case place proposal through the Deputy Commissioner to the Inspector General, Prison within a period of 7 days for constitution of a Medical Board under the Military Hospital, Namkum for coming to an opinion for referral of VIP prisoners or dreaded criminal prisoner.
4.In case no recommendation is made within a period of 1 month by the Military Hospital, Namkum, further action would be taken in the light of the recommendation of RIMS, Ranchi. In cases where such prisoner is sent for treatment outside the State, the provisions of Section 3 of Transfer of Prisoners Act, 1950 would be applicable to ensure that such prisoner be kept in jail of the said concerned District in the circumstances, when immediate admission of the prisoner is not possible in the higher medical intuitions outside the State. Other safety precaution are also prescribed under the SOP.
4. Having taken note of the specific statement made in relation to the compliance of the order passed by this Court earlier by the Chief Secretary, Jharkhand himself, we do not consider it necessary to keep the present public interest litigation pending any further. Accordingly, it is disposed of.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh,J) (Anil Kumar Choudhary,J) jk