1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.327 OF 2009 (Chandu Bhika Manjre vs. State and another) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND P.B. VARALE, JJ. DATED : JULY 29, 2009 Heard Shri Bhat, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Shri Deshpande, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents. Shri Bhat, learned Counsel for the petitioner, states that petitioner is undergoing sentence for life in Nagpur Central Prison. The grievance of the petitioner is in respect of not giving proper medical treatment to him by the Jail Authorities. It is submitted that petitioner had suffered a paralytic attack and requires medical treatment from the Orthopaedic Surgeon. It is contended that this facility is not available in the 2 Central Prison, Nagpur and, therefore, it is necessary for the Jail Authorities to take the petitioner to the concerned Doctor as and when it is necessary. However, the Jail Authorities did not do so and, therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present petition. Shri Deshpande, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents, states that the allegations made by the petitioner against the Jail Authorities are false. It is submitted that the Jail Authorities have extended proper medical treatment to the petitioner and the petitioner was taken to the Orthopaedic Doctor on various occasions. A chart in this regard is annexed with the reply filed by the respondents as Annexure-I. It is further submitted that even in future, whenever it is necessary, the petitioner will be taken to the appropriate Orthopaedic Doctor and the petitioner will be provided necessary medical treatment. We have considered the rival contentions of the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the chart annexed with the reply. From the perusal of the chart, it appears that the petitioner on umpteen 3 number of occasions was taken to the Orthopaedic Doctor and Neuro Surgeon. It is, therefore, apparent that whenever it was necessary, the Jail Authorities had taken the petitioner to the concerned Doctor for treatment. However, we want to observe that in future the Jail Authorities shall take the petitioner to the concerned Doctor whenever it is necessary to do so. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE khj