‘No special favours’: SC rejects Covid+ve ’84 convict’s bail plea

YADAV, WHO IS IN THE ICU, ARGUED THAT HIS RELATIVES ARE NOT BEING ALLOWED TO VISIT HIM AT THE HOSPITAL

NEWDELHI: A convict who has contracted Covid-19 and is in hospital cannot get any special treatment or favours, the Supreme Court observed on Wednesday while rejecting the plea for interim bail by ex-councillor Mahender Singh Yadav, a co-convict in 1984 antiSikh riots.

Yadav, who has contracted Covid and is currently in intensive care unit (ICU) of Lok Nayak Hospital in Delhi, argued that his relatives are not being allowed to visit him at the hospital and he should be granted interim bail so as to enable his family members to take suitable steps in view of his deteriorating health.

“If a person is in ICU, nobody can visit him. The petitioner cannot be given differential treatment because he is under detention,” the bench headed by justice Indira Banerjee remarked.

Yadav was sentenced to three years imprisonment by the trial court in 2013 for his role in the 1984 anti-sikh riots in Delhi in which more than 2,700 sikh persons were massacred in the aftermath of the assassination of then prime minister Indira Gandhi by her bodyguards.

Yadav was convicted for the offence of rioting by the trial court and sentenced to three years in jail. The conviction and sentence was upheld by the Delhi high court in December 2018.

Yadav, who tested positive for Covid-19 on June 26, pointed out that one of the 29 inmates with whom he was sharing barracks at the Mandoli jail in Delhi passed away due to the coronavirus disease. Seventeen of the remaining inmates were found to be Covid positive, he added.

Yadav also cited his advanced age (more than 70 years) and diabetes and kidney ailments as grounds to seek bail.

“The petitioner cannot even walk properly without support and doctor has suggested replacement of both knees. He is also suffering from acute diabetes and other kidney problems,” the plea said.

Senior counsel R Basant, appearing for Yadav, submitted that even at the hospital two constables are posted out of his ward and relatives are not allowed to visit him.

Additional solicitor general KM Nataraj appearing for the government submitted that all the patients are given equal treatment and there is no discrimination meted out to the petitioner or the members of his family on the ground that he is a convict.

The bench, which also comprised justice BR Gavai, noted that there was no specific suggestion forthcoming from Yadav as to what steps his family intended to take if Yadav was released on bail.

“There is no offer from the family to shift the petitioner to any other hospital. There is not even a whisper in the petition that any differential treatment is meted to the patient or to his relatives on the ground of incarceration of the petitioner,” the court said while dismissing the plea.

The Supreme Court had, on May 13, rejected the plea for interim bail filed by former Congress MP and a prominent convict in the 1984 riots cases, Sajjan Kumar. Kumar had also sought interim bail on health grounds but the court turned down the plea stating that Kumar did not require immediate hospitalisation as per the medical report submitted by All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi.