The Allahabad High Court recently took a stern stance against the Uttar Pradesh government for failing to provide medical treatment to an undertrial prisoner, Qayamuddin. The accused was denied surgery on multiple occasions due to the non-availability of police personnel, who were assigned to election duties.
In April 2024, the Additional Sessions Judge directed the Jail Superintendent of District Jail, Deoria, to ensure medical treatment for Qayamuddin. However, the Jail Superintendent refused, citing the ongoing Lok Sabha elections and the shortage of security personnel. He assured that treatment would be arranged once adequate police force was available.
During the hearing of his second bail plea in September 2024, Justice Samit Gopal of the Allahabad High Court condemned this reasoning, stating:
“The accused is in custody under the supervision of the State. The State cannot, by any stretch, deny providing him adequate medical facility on any ground.”
The judge further directed the District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police, Deoria, to personally look into the matter and submit affidavits explaining why medical care was not provided in a timely manner.
State's Response and Court's Discontent
Following the court's directive, the District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police submitted their affidavits, detailing the medical treatment received by the accused. The report stated that Qayamuddin had been receiving medical care at the District Jail and was referred to several medical institutions, including the BRD Medical College, for better treatment.
The affidavits also confirmed that:
- The accused underwent surgery on July 9, 2024, at BRD Medical College.
- He received treatment at the District Hospital and a local Medical College before surgery.
- The police force was unavailable for escorting him to the hospital on three separate occasions due to election duties.
Although the court acknowledged that treatment was eventually provided, it strongly objected to the delay and the excuse given by jail authorities. Justice Samit Gopal remarked:
“The life of an individual, even if he is in jail, cannot be taken for ransom for any reason. The State has a bounden duty to protect the life of every citizen and must ensure timely and proper treatment for prisoners, regardless of any other activities within the State.”
The court emphasized that the refusal to escort the accused for surgery was an unacceptable violation of his fundamental rights.
Apart from addressing the medical negligence, the court also took note of the accused’s absence from trial proceedings due to his hospitalization. The Superintendent of Police informed the court that the accused's appearance in person was not possible due to his admission in the jail hospital.
To ensure that the trial is not delayed indefinitely, the court sought a fresh report on:
- The accused’s current medical condition and whether he is fit to appear before the trial court.
- The feasibility of video conferencing for his court appearances, provided the accused consents.
The court has demanded a response within ten days and has scheduled the next hearing for March 6, 2025.
Case title - Qayamuddin vs. State of U.P
