On May 16, 2025, the Delhi High Court rejected the interim bail plea of A.S. Ismail, a leader of the now-banned Popular Front of India (PFI), who was seeking release on medical grounds. Ismail is currently incarcerated under charges framed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The court's decision was based on medical assessments indicating significant improvement in Ismail's health, thereby negating the necessity for bail on medical grounds.
A division bench comprising Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar reviewed Ismail's appeal against a trial court's December 13, 2024, order, which had previously denied his interim bail request. The High Court upheld the trial court's decision, emphasizing that Ismail's health condition had improved substantially during his incarceration. The court noted that he was receiving appropriate medical care, including physiotherapy and regular monitoring of his blood pressure, as prescribed by medical professionals.
The court's assessment was informed by a medical report from the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), where a Medical Board had been constituted to evaluate Ismail's health. The report indicated that Ismail's condition had improved to the extent that he exhibited only mild facial asymmetry and had regained mobility with assistance, no longer requiring a wheelchair. The court concluded that Ismail's health was stable and that continued treatment within the jail facilities was sufficient to manage his condition.
The NIA opposed the interim bail, arguing that Ismail's release could pose a threat to public safety. The agency alleged that Ismail was involved in radicalizing Muslim youth against the Indian government and promoting the establishment of Islamic rule in India. They also accused him of creating communal disharmony and threatening the sovereignty and integrity of the nation. The court acknowledged these concerns, noting that charges had been framed against Ismail and that there was substantial evidence supporting the allegations.
In its ruling, the court directed jail authorities to continue providing Ismail with the necessary medical treatment, including regular physiotherapy and monthly visits to AIIMS for monitoring his condition. The court emphasized that Ismail's health was not in a state that warranted interim bail and that adequate medical care was being provided within the incarceration facilities.
This decision underscores the judiciary's approach to balancing individual health concerns with broader considerations of public safety and the integrity of ongoing investigations. The court's reliance on comprehensive medical evaluations and its directive for continued medical oversight within the jail system reflect a commitment to ensuring that detainees receive appropriate care without compromising legal proceedings or public security.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.