Medical bail of Amar Mulchandani rejected
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court dismissed the medical bail plea filed by Amar Mulchandani, the former chairman of Seva Vikas Co-operative Bank, who was arrested by t he Enforcement Directorate (ED) for allegedly defrauding the bank of ₹429.57 crore. The court, however, directed superintendent of the Arthur Road to admit him to JJ Hospital, as an indoor patient for two weeks of treatment.
On July 1, 2023, Mulchandani was arrested by the ED on charges of financial malpractice during his tenure as chairman of the Pune-based Seva Vikas Cooperative Bank. The ED alleges that between 1997 and 2003, as well as from 2009 to 2020, Mulchandani was involved in the illicit generation and layering of criminal proceeds totaling ₹429.57 crore. In his plea to the high court, Mulchandani asserted that he had a known case of severe diabetes mellitus and heart disease Post-arrest, his health has significantly deteriorated. Mulchandani highlighted inadequacies in the diagnosis and treatment provided both at the prison hospital and Sir JJ Group of Hospitals. He emphasised the worsening of his health over the preceding months. Seeking bail on grounds of being “sick and infirm,” Mulchandani underscored the urgency of his medical condition.
ED opposed Mulchandani’s bail plea, claiming that his health condition was not such that he deserved to be released on bail. The agency further stated that he suffered from ailments that can be treated at government hospitals.
Justice NJ Jamadar accepted the arguments advanced by advocate Hiten Venegaonkar on behalf of ED, noticing that the clinical examination of the accused did not reveal any significant abnormalities in cardiovascular, respiratory, and abdominal health.
The judge noted Mulchandani’s diabetic retinopathy and neuropathy, acknowledging his challenges in prison life. But the court dismissed Mulchandani’s bail petition due to his neurological issues, prescribing medication and physiotherapy with regular follow-ups. The court deemed him “sick and infirm” but stated surgical intervention was not necessary.