IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19.08.2010 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. SATHYANARAYANAN HCP. No.1529 of 2010 Beena ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai – 600 066. 2. The Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Central Bureau, South Zonal Unit, Chennai – 600 090. ... Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the first respondent to produce the body of the petitioner's husband by name Annachi @ Arulraj, son of Mr. M. Venugopal, now confined in Central Prizon, Puzhal, Chennai before this Court and further direct the first respondent to permit the prisoner to have medical treatment of his choice in a private hospital at the cost of the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr. M.G. Sankaran for Ms. S. shanthakumari For Respondents: Mr. Babu Muthumeeran Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by M. CHOCKALINGAM,J) This habeas corpus petition is brought forth by one Mrs.Beena, wife of Annachi @ Arulraj, seeking a direction to the first respondent to permit the prisoner to have medical treatment https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of his choice in a private hospital at the cost of the petitioner since her husband is suffering from Cancer. 2. Affidavit filed in support of the petition is perused. The Court heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The reports were called for as to the treatment of the said convict and the same are produced before this Court and they are perused. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner's husband is confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai. He is facing trial before the Additional District and Sessions Court, Special Court for E.C. and N.D.P.S. Act cases, Pudukottai along with other accused. He was arrested by the second respondent and remanded to judicial custody on 1.4.2009 and at present he is confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai. He is a Srilankan, aged 39 years. It was found medically that he was suffering from Cancer and was admitted in Government Hospital, Royapettah, Chennai in the convict ward on 18.4.2010 where it was actually found that he was affected by Cancer in the kidney. A bail application in Crl.M.P. No.149 of 2010 filed before the Additional District and Sessions Court, Pudukkottai was also dismissed on merits by an order dated 20.4.2010. Even after it was found that he is suffering from Cancer in kidney, no proper treatment was given by the second respondent and he was not taken to the Government Hospital in time because of lack of escort facility. 4. Apart from that, the Trial Court gave direction to the first respondent on 11.6.2010 for giving necessary treatment. Despite the same, it has not been given. Since her husband is affected by cancer, it becomes necessary to give proper treatment in the private hospital of his choice, for which he is also ready to bear the expenses. Under such circumstances, the present petition has got to be ordered. 5. The Court heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and paid its anxious consideration on the submissions made. 6. It is not in controversy that the husband of the petitioner is under trial prisoner before the Court of Sessions, Pudukottai for the case registered under NDPS Act in C.C. No.93 of 2009. It is also an admitted fact that he is at present in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and on medical check-up, it was found that he is suffering from Cancer in kidney. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the treatment has got to be given to the convict in a private hospital of his choice cannot be countenanced. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7. The circumstance warrants for giving proper treatment. The report is also called for from Government Hospital, Royapettah. A perusal of the same, it is clear that the convict was taken to the Government Hospital, Royapettah for review on 17.7.2010, 24.7.2010, 12.8.2010 and 13.08.2010. They are also looked into. Under such circumstances, the Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case where the treatment has to be given consistently and not making a review on different dates, which would not serve the purpose. Hence, the petitioner's husband Annachi @ Arulraj has got to be given treatment at the Government Hospital, Royapettah and it was verified as to whether any convict ward is available at the Royapettah Government Hospital. The Court is of the considered opinion that a direction has got to be given to the first respondent to take the prisoner and admit him in the Oncologist ward particularly for the purpose of giving treatment for cancer. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that treatment has got to be given to take him to the General Hospital, Madras where separate department was also available, but at the same time, the Court has to look into the cost for the purpose of providing escort for the said purpose. 9. Therefore, for giving treatment at present, it is suffice to give direction to the first respondent to take the prisoner Annachi @ Arulraj and admit him in the Government Hospital, Royapettah separately in the Prisoner's ward and also direction is given to the first respondent for giving instructions for giving proper treatment as one required. The habeas corpus petition is disposed of accordingly. ssa. Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To 1. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai – 600 066. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Central Bureau, South Zonal Unit, Chennai – 600 090. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras + 1 cc to Mrs. S. Shanthakumari, Advocate SR No.61167 NG(CO) SR/20.8.2010 H.C.P. No.1529 of 2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/