Sapam Charubala Vs National Investigation Agency

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

304 paragraphs · 7,028 words

R.S., CJ

[1] This appeal has been filed challenging the order of the learned Special Judge (NIA), Manipur in Cril. Misc.(B) Case No.44 of 2018 on 06.11.2018. By the order dated 6.11.2018, the learned Special Judge (NIA), Manipur, while rejecting the bail application for the reasons stated therein, directed that the appellant-accused should be medically treated. The reasons for rejecting the bail and the reasons for directing the medical treatment are at page Nos.68 and 69, which are as follows:-

"Ld. Spl P. P. (NIA), further submitted that despite Order of this Court dtd 24/08/2018 directing that the number of visitors to the accused in the Security Ward, JNIMS to his wife, any of the children, the PRO and one attendant, the accused tried to meet various officials of Saikul area, as disclosed by the officials in their statement. As such, the accused had intention to interfere with the investigation by concealing or destroying/manipulating the evidence and influencing other witnesses during his judicial custody at JNIMS.

"Ld. Spl.P.P. (NIA) also added that the accused is already under medical supervision and is getting proper medical facility. Further the accused is a politically and economically powerful person in the locality of Imphal and surrounding areas. Also, NIA has got sufficient material on record to establish the involvement and vital role of the accused in the present case and hence releasing him on bail would seriously jeopardise the case of the prosecution.

I have also received the report from the Special State Medical Board, sitting held on 05/11/2018 at 11 a.m., wherein it was advised that the patient needs treatment and hospitalization at a sophisticated cardiac centre,

Under the circumstances, after taking into consideration the materials on record, on hearing both counsels and on the recommendation of the State Medical Board, the accused is permitted to be treated at the Cardio-Thoracic Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AlIMS), New Delhi for his ailments. His prayer for grant of bail is, however, rejected.

Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail Sajiwa is directed to provide personnel for escorting the accused upto his destination.

Authorities of NIA are to move to the Special Judge (NIA), New Delhi for facilitating all necessary arrangements for security wards, security personnel etc. at AIIMS prior to transit of the accused. Further, NIA is to submit the list of permitted visitors/caretakers for the accused as already allowed in this application viz., wife of the accused, any of the children, the PRO and one attendant, at the time of filing an application before the Special Judge (NIA),New Delhi.

Also NIA is to submit a monthly progress report on the health of the accused.

Put up the report so submitted in the connected remand case, pending before this Court.

Send a copy of this Order to the Special Judge (NIA), Delhi through the authorities of the NIA for information.

Also furnish a copy of this Order to both parties for information.\

Send also a copy of this Order to the Superintendent, Manipur Céntral Jail, Sajiwa for information and compliance.

The case is disposed of as rejected.

Announced."

[2] The appellant has now moved this Court to set aside the order dated 06.11.2018 rejecting the bail. Notice was sent to the State as well as to the National Investigation Agency. Pending the bail petition in and by the Miscellaneous Case Misc. (Cril. Appeal) No.4 of 2018, this Court considered the apprehension expressed by the Special Court in relation to the health of the appellant-accused and the nature of order passed. Thereafter, various interim orders were passed by this Court, namely, 27.11.2018, 04.12.2018, 20.12.2018, 28.2.2019, 070.3.2019 and 14.3.2019 which are extracted as below:-

"27.11.2018

This appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 06.11.2018 rejecting the appeal. In that order, the following directions have been issued by the Court :

"Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail Sajiwa is directed to provide personnel for escorting the accused upto his destination.

Also NIA is to submit a monthly progress report on the health of the accused.

Put up the report so submitted in the connected remand case, pending before this Court.

Send a copy of this Order to the Special Judge (NIA), Delhi through the authorities of the NIA for information.

Also furnish a copy of this Order to both parties for information.

Send also a copy of this Order to the Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa for information and compliance."

Subsequently, another order has been passed on 13.11.2018 which reads as follows :

"Under the circumstances, the Superintendent, JNIMS is directed to make a make arrangement for round the clock vigil of attending doctors and nurses and also get psychiatric examination of the accused Yamthong Haokip.

Further, the Superintendent of Police, Imphal East is to provide adequate security arrangement in and around the security ward, where the accused Shree Yamthong Haokip is getting treated.

It is noted here that vide Order dtd. 06/11/2018 in Cril. Misc. (B) Case No. 44 of 2018, it was directed that the accused be treated at the Cardio-Thoracic Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, in view of his deteriorating health conditions. Further, the authorities of NIA were directed to move the Special Judge (NIA), New Delhi for making security arrangements while the accused gets treatment at AIIMS and at the same time, the Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa was directed to provide personnel for escorting the accused upto his destination.

Taking in view the present developments, as reported by the Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa, it is hereby further directed to both the NIA and the Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa to speed up the proceedings for transit of the accused Shree Yamthong Haokip.

On the other hand, the permitted family members and attendants, viz., wife of the accused, Shree Yamthong Haokip, any of the children, the PRO and one attendant be given access at all times and in any combination, until the accused get transferred to AIIMS.

It is mentioned herein that Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa is at liberty to approach Higher Authorities in the event of hurdles in arrangements for transit of the accused Shree Yamthong Haokip.

Furnish a copy of this Order to the NIA for information and further necessary action.

Also furnish a copy of this Order to the I.G. (Prison) for making all necessary arrangements, wherever, required.

Furnish, also a copy each of this Order to the Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa and to the Superintendent of Police, Imphal East for information and necessary action."

In view of the above, in order to ensure the order of the Court, the following authorities are added as respondents, namely, th Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa and Superintendent of Police, Imphal East so as to enable them to get instructions. They are directed to get instructions from JNIMS as to the steps taken for shifting the accused to AIIMS, Delhi and also instructions based on the direction of the Special Judge(NIA), Manipur.

Notice be issued to them.

Mr. RK Umakanta, learned GA takes notice on behalf of the newly impleaded respondents.

List the matter on 04.12.2018."

"04.12.2018.

"Today, as directed by the Court, Shri S. Touthang, the Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa is present in Court and stated that as per the direction of the Special Court and the further direction of this Court, medical evaluation has been done by the Department of Medicine, JNIMS, Imphal. The report is dated 01.12.2018.

The report is signed by the following persons:- (i) Medical Superintendent, JNIMS Hospital, Porompat, Imphal East, (ii) Professor & HOD, Department of Medicine, JNIMS, Imphal and (iii) Senior Resident, Department of Medicine, JNIMS, Imphal. It gives clear picture about the condition of the petitioner who is now in judicial custody and the report also gives suggestion as to how further treatment is to be undertaken and the precautionary steps to be taken if the petitioner/patient is to be shifted to AIIMS.

In this regard, the Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa and the Advocate General state that for providing air ambulance certain special measures have to be taken. Therefore, some more time is required and in the meanwhile, the medical treatment will continue at JNIMS, Imphal. Learned AG produced a copy of the Government order dated 28th November, 2018 permitting personnel to accompany the petitioner accused for treatment at Delhi. The order dated 28th November, 2018 reads as follows :-

"GOVERNMENT OF MANIPUR SECRETARIAT:

HOME DEPARTMENT

---

ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR: MANIPUR

Imphal, the 28th November, 2018

No.26/28(1)/17-H(J)(Ex-SJ): The Governor of Manipur is pleased to accord sanction to the ex-State Journey from Imphal to New Delhi and back in respect of the following personnel of Manipur Jail Department in connection with ex-State medical treatment of UTP namely, Shri Yamthong Haokip (75) s/o (L) Holkhothang Haokip of Mantripukhri, Opp. MICO, PS Heingang, Imphal East at Cardio-Thoracic Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi:-

Shri Kh. Hooter, Assistant Jailor.

Shri L. Dineshwor Singh, Warder.

Further, the period of ex-State Journey of the above Assistant Jailor and Warder, including the period spent on ex State medical treatment of the above UTP shall be treated as on duty and they are entitled to get TA/DA.

By orders & in the name of Governor,

Sd/-

(Dr.Th. Charanjeet Singh)

Deputy Secretary (Home)

Government of Manipur

---

Copy to :-

Director General of Police, Manipur

Accountant General, Manipur

Addl. Director General of Police (Prisons), Manipur. This refers to his letter No. 19/2/2018- IG(J)/916 dated 14/11/2018

Persons concerned

Treasury Officer concerned

Guard File"

In the meanwhile, counsel for the petitioner states that he will take instructions with regard to movement from Imphal to Delhi by air ambulance.

List the matter on 11.12.2018.

Copy of the order and report be issued to the Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa, learned AG, Mr. Kh. Samarjit, counsel for the respondent and Mr. I. Bikramjit, learned counsel for the petitioner."

20.12.2018

"Today, when the matter was taken up, Mr. M. Hemchandra, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently pleaded that in terms of provisos to Section 437 (1) (ii), the petitioner who is medically sick and infirm should be granted bail. The relevant para reads as follows :

"Provided that the Court may direct that a person referred to in clause (i) or clause (ii) be released on bail if such person is under the age of sixteen years or is a woman or is sick or infirm:

Provided further that the Court may also direct that a person referred to in clause (ii) be released on bail if it is satisfied that it is just and proper so to do for any other special reason."

He refers to various paragraphs of the order of the Special Judge in relation to the medical condition despite which he rejected the bail.

According to Shri Hemchandra, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, for the past 100 days no proper investigation has been done. However, Shri Kh. Samarjit, learned counsel appearing for the NIA seeks time to file his objection to the bail in the form of report as to the steps taken by the NIA in the instant case. He also states that certain records cannot be disclosed on public and it will be placed in sealed cover, if Court so directs. He also pointed out that the Special Court had clearly given the reason for dismissing the bail. The relevant para reads as follows :

"Ld. Spl P.P. (NIA), further submitted that despite Order of this Court dtd. 24/08/2018 directing that the number of visitors to the accused in the Security Ward, JNIMS to his wife, any of the children, the PRO and one attendant, the accused tried to meet various officials of Saikul area, as disclosed by the officials in their statement. As such, the accused had intention to interfere with the investigation by concealing or destroying/manipulating the evidence and influencing other witnesses during his judicial custody at JNIMS."

In the light of the above factual matrix we call upon the NIA to file its response to the plea made in the present appeal. We also clarify in the meanwhile that respondents shall take steps to provide medical facility at the AIIMS as directed by the Special Court as per the procedure prescribed.

At this, Mr. Hemchandra, learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner stated that the family members are apprehending threats from the NIA. This statement is objected strongly by Mr. Samarjit, learned counsel appearing for the NIA and under no circumstances, the NIA will threaten the family members of the petitioner, clarifying that investigation will be done in accordance with law and as per procedure prescribed.

List the matter on 16.01.2019 for filing response by the NIA.

"28.02.2019

Heard Shri. M. Hemchandra, learned Senior counsel for the applicant and also the learned Advocate General for the State and Mr. Kh. Samarjit for the NIA. On previous occasion dated 27.11.2018 the following order was passed :-

"This appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 06.11.2018 rejecting the appeal. In that order, the following directions have been issued by the Court :

"Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail Sajiwa is directed to provide personnel for escorting the accused upto his destination. Authorities of NIA are to move to the Special Judge (NIA), New Delhi for facilitating all necessary arrangements for security wards, security personnel etc. at AIIMS prior to transit of the accused. Further, NIA is to submit the list of permitted visitors/caretakers for the accused as already allowed in this application viz., wife of the accused, any of the children, the PRO and one attendant, at the time of filing an application before the Special Judge (NIA), New Delhi.

Also NIA is to submit a monthly progress report on the health of the accused.

Put up the report so submitted in the connected remand case, pending before this Court.

Send a copy of this Order to the Special Judge (NIA), Delhi through the authorities of the NIA for information.

Also furnish a copy of this Order to both parties for information.

Send also a copy of this Order to the Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa for information and compliance."

Subsequently, another order has been passed on 13.11.2018 which reads as follows :

Further, the Superintendent of Police, Imphal East is to provide adequate security arrangement in and around the security ward, where the accused Shree YamthongHaokip is getting treated.

On the other hand, the permitted family members and attendants, viz., wife of the accused, Shree YamthongHaokip, any of the children, the PRO and one attendant be given access at all times and in any combination, until the accused get transferred to AIIMS.

Furnish a copy of this Order to the NIA for information and further necessary action.

Also furnish a copy of this Order to the I.G. (Prison) for 3 making all necessary arrangements, wherever, required.

Furnish, also a copy each of this Order to the Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa and to the Superintendent of Police, Imphal East for information and necessary action."

In view of the above, in order to ensure the order of the Court, the following authorities are added as respondents, namely, the Superintendent, Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa and Superintendent of Police, Imphal East so as to enable them to get instructions. They are directed to get instructions from JNIMS as to the steps taken for shifting the accused to AIIMS, Delhi and also instructions based on the direction of the Special Judge(NIA), Manipur.

Notice be issued to them.

Mr. RK Umakanta, learned GA takes notice on behalf of the newly impleaded respondents.

List the matter on 04.12.2018."

Again, on 4.12.2018 another order was passed,

"GOVERNMENT OF MANIPUR

SECRETARIAT :HOME DEPARTMENT

---

ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR: MANIPUR

Imphal, the 28th November, 2018

No.26/28(1)/17-H(J)(Ex-SJ): The Governor of Manipur is pleased to accord sanction to the ex-State Journey from Imphal to 4 New Delhi and back in respect of the following personnel of Manipur Jail Department in connection with ex-State medical treatment of UTP namely, Shri YamthongHaokip (75) s/o (L) Holkhothang Haokip of Mantripukhri, Opp. MICO, PS Heingang, Imphal East at Cardio-Thoracic Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi:-

Shri Kh. Hooter, Assistant Jailor.

Shri L. Dineshwor Singh, Warder.

Further, the period of ex-State Journey of the above Assistant Jailor and Warder, including the period spent on ex-State medical treatment of the above UTP shall be treated as on duty and they are entitled to get TA/DA.

By orders & in the name of Governor,

Sd/-

(Dr.Th. Charanjeet Singh)

Deputy Secretary (Home)

Government of Manipur

---

Copy to :-

Director General of Police, Manipur

Accountant General, Manipur

Addl. Director General of Police (Prisons), Manipur. This refers to his letter No. 19/2/2018-IG(J)/916 dated 14/11/2018

Persons concerned

Treasury Officer concerned

Guard File"

In the meanwhile, counsel for the petitioner states that he will take instructions with regard to movement from Imphal to Delhi by air ambulance.

List the matter on 11.12.2018.

In terms of the 2(two) orders and as per the opinion of the Doctor of the JNIMS, the need to shift the accused person to AIIMS, New Delhi was impressed upon the respondent Government.

Today, when the matter was taken up, learned AG produced the letter from the Deputy Secretary (Home) dated 25.02.2019 which reads as follows:

"GOVERNMENT OF MANIPUR

SECRETARIAT: HOME DEPARTMENT

Imphal, 25th February, 2019.

To,

P. Thamphamani Singh,

Junior Government Advocate

To the Advocate General, Manipur.

Subject: Cril.Appeal No.8 of 2018

Sapam Charubala @ Charubala Haokip-vs-National Investigation Agency & 2 others

Sir,

In inviting a reference to your letter No.1/AG/2018/Cril/8-2018© dated 07/02/2019 on the above subject and to furnish the Action Taken Report in c/w with the movement of UTP, namely Shri Yamthong Haokip from JNIMS, Imphal to AIIMS, New Delhi for EX-State treatment by Air Ambulance:

i) Finance Department, Government of Manipur has given concurrence to Expenditure Sanction and Encashment Permission for an amount of Rs. 12.00 lakhs which is require for advance payment in c/w hiring of Air Ambulance for the movement of the UTP from JNIMS, Imphal to AIIMS, New Delhi.

ii) M/S Air Charter Service, New Delhi has been requested to submit Performa Bill and e-transfer mandate so that amount may be encased and advance payment may be made to book the Air Ambulance at the earliest.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/-

(Dr. Th. Charanjeet Singh)

Deputy Secretary (Home)

Govt. of Manipur"

Considering the health condition of the accused person as expressed by the learned senior counsel, we direct the State to immediately implement the suggestion given by the Doctor of the Jail based on the letter from the Deputy Secretary (Home) dated 25.02.2019 at the earliest preferably before 6.03.2019.

We make it clear further extension of time may not be justified. All officers concerned are directed to implement the above direction without demur and report. The need to provide adequate medical care to the person accused who is in Judicial custody is also important.

The argument of Senior counsel Mr. M. Hemchandra on merits is that the Court below failed to take into consideration the 2(two) documents and the said documents have to be produced before this Court for better appreciation is accepted. The documents are as follows:

1) Original State Medical Board report dated 05.02.2019

given by the specially constituted Board.

2) Original status report of the accused dated 01.02.2019

issued by the Medical Superintendent, JNIMS.

Learned AG is directed to call for and submit the same in a sealed cover on the next hearing date.

List the matter for compliance of the above on 07.03.2019.

Copies of this order be furnished to all the learned counsel of the parties."

"07.03.2019

As per the order dated 28.02.2019, AG produced the sealed cover containing the report of the State Medical Board dated 05.02.2019. However, the report dated 01.02.2019 issued by the Medical Superintendent, JNIMS was not produced and AG was given an unreadable copy of the medical report dated 01.02.2019 issued by the Medical Superintendent, JNIMS by the petitioner counsel and AG took time to produce the same on the next hearing date in the sealed cover. However, AG seeks time to produce the original document of the status report dated 01.02.2019 or 02.02.2019 or 01.02.2018 whichever is correct before this Court on the next hearing date.

AG has also submitted a list of documents X/1 to X/11 indicating that as per order of the Court they could not shift the under trial prisoner on or before 06.03.2019 because of bad weather and the air ambulance was not in a position to shift the UTP.

At the same time, State is also taking steps to engage service of another air ambulance, namely, Air Rescuers World Wide Pvt. Ltd. and date of shifting the undertrial is confirmed as 09.03.2019. The communications X/2, X3, X/4, X/5, X/6, X/7, X/8, X/9, X/10 and X/11 are all relating to the arrangements made by the State to shift the undertrial prisoner to AIIMS, Delhi on 09.03.2019.

For reporting compliance as above, list the matter on 14.03.2019."

14.3.2019

"In compliance with the order of the Trial Court and further direction of this Court to provide best medical facilities to the petitioners husband/accused in the case, the Deputy Secretary (Home), Govt. of Manipur submitted the letter dated 12th March, 2019 which reads as follows :

"No.6/87(1)/18-H(J)(M/CONF)

GOVERNMENT OF MANIPUR

SECRETARIAT: HOME DEPARTMENT

Imphal, 12'" March, 2019

To,

P. Thamphamanl Singh,

Junior Government Advocate

To the Advocate General, Manipur.

Subject: Crll. Appeal No.8 of 2018

Sapam Charubala@ Charubala Haokip-vs-

National Investigation Agency & 2 others

Sir,

In inviting a reference to your letter No.1/AG/2018/Cril/8-2018© dated 08/03/2019 on the above subject and to furnish the Action Taken Report in c/w with the treatment of UTP, namely Shri Yamthong Haokip

Shri Yamthong Haokip, MLA has been shifted from JNIMS, Porompat to AIIMS, Delhi on 10/03/2019 by Air Ambulance for further treatment in compliance with the Orders of the Hon‟ble High Court. The aforesaid patient could not be shifted on 09/03/2019 due to technical issue pertaining to the Air Ambulance. An email letter from Air Rescuers World Wide Ltd. is enclosed in this regard.

The aforesaid Patient is at present undergoing treatment at AIIMS, Delhi.

Enclosure: As stated above.

Yours faithfully

Sd/-

(Dr. Th. Charanjeet Singh)

Deputy Secretary (Home)

Govt. of Manipur."

E-mail dated March 8, 2019 with the subject Imphal Delhi charter air ambulance quotation reads as follows:-

"Dear Sir,

Greetings from Air Rescuers Worldwide PVt. Ltd.

We were suppose to Fly from Imphal to Delhi on 9" March, 2019, but due to some technical issue in the aircraft we are not able to do the same.

On 9th of March we will be landing at Imphal and day after tomorrow that is on 10th of March we will be flying to Delhi.

We will land Imphal on 9th of March approx. at 3.30 PM. Departure will be next day mornings at 10.00 AM. So please consider the following and allow us to serve you at our best."

Thanks and Regards.

Shubhangi

(+91 7400415091)

The compliance of the direction of this Court is recorded.

For argument in bail application, list the matter on 10.04.2019."

[3] On the basis of these orders and the steps as taken by the State, the appellant-accused was taken by air ambulance to AIIMS, New Delhi and was treated for some time and sent back to Manipur and he is presently in JNIMS undergoing further treatment.

[4] Learned Advocate General produces a copy of the letter dated 10.4.2019 issued by the Addl. Director General of Police (Prisons), Manipur to the Special Secretary (Home), Government of Manipur together with report of the All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi and the discharge summary dated 26.03.2019, which are extracted below for better clarity.

"No.19/2/2019-1G (J)(1)

GOVERNMENT OF MANIPUR

JAIL DEPARTMENT

Imphal, the 10th April, 2019.

The Special Secretary (Home),

Government of Manipur

Subject: - Discharge of UTP namely Shri Yamthong Haokip from

AIIMS, New Delhi.

Sir

Please refer to Government of Manipur, Home Department letter No. 6/87(1)/18- HU(M/CONE) dated 30/03/2019 regarding bringing back of one UTP namely, Shri Yamthong Haokip from AlIMS, New Delhi. The UTP was discharged from Department of Cardiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi on 7/4/2019 (Discharge Summary enclosed).

It may be mentioned here that the UTP Shri Yamthong Haokip was examined by the Medical Board of AlIMS, New Delhi on 16/03/2019 and 26/03/2019 (copy of the proceeding enclosed). As per the report of the Medical Board, the UTP was found to have adjustment reaction/disorder and advised appropriate management following which he improved. He can continue follow-up at local medical facility. The Board recommended that the UTP can be discharged form AIIMS and referred back to JNIMS, Imphal. Accordingly the UTP was discharged on 7/4/2019 The UTP was brought back from AlIMS, New Delhi to Imphal on 7/4/2019 and admitted/hospitalized at Male Medicine Unit II Bed No. 28 of JNIMS Hospital, Porompat on the same day. Later, he has shifted to Special Ward A-V of JNIMS Hospital on 9/4/2019 This is for information of the Government please

Yours faithfully

Enclosed: As above.

Sd/-

(P. Doungel) IPS

Addl. Director General of Police

(Prisons),

Manipur, Imphal

Imphal, the 10th April, 2019."

Crl.A. No.8 of 2018 Page 14 of 22

"GOVERNMENT OF MANIPUR

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT, MANIPUR CENTRAL JAIL,

SAJIWA, MANIPUR

Imphal, the 8th April, 2019.

To,

The Addl. Director General of Police (Prisons)

Manipur.

Subject Discharge of UTP patient Yamthong Haokip from AIIMS, New Dell"

Cril.Misc.No.44 of 2013

Ref RC-02/2018/NIA-GUW

U/S 409/ 120-B IPC & Sec.20 UA(P) Act

Sir,

Please refer to Discharge Summary issued by All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi, Department of Cardiology and Medical Board Report by All India Instltute of Medlcal Science (Cardio Thoracic & Neuro Science Centre) Ansari Nagar, New Delhi-110029 along with O.P.D ticket of A.I.I.M.S., New Delhi-110029, I have the honour to state that the UTP patient namely, Yamthong Haokip (75) s/o (L) Holkhothang Haokip of Mantripukhri, Opposite MICO, P S.Heingang, District Imphal East, Manipur was admitted/hospitalised at Male Medicine Unit-II, Bed No.28 of JNIMS Hospital, Porompat on 7/4/2019 after he was discharged and brought back by the Escort team from AIIMS, New Delhi by Stretcher bound Air India Flight on 7/4/2019 at 12:15 noon.

Further, it may also be mentioned that as per report of the Medical Board of AIIMS, the Medical Superintendent, AIIMS got Mr. Yamthong admitted in C.T. Centre and constituted a Medical Board to decide for his treatment. The Committee first met on 16/3/2019. The Members of the Medical board met again on 26/3/2019, went through the reports and deliberated on the medical condition and future course of management,. Mr. Yamthong was found to have diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, Coronary Artery Disease, post PCI and post ICD. At the time of admission he was found to be pulmonary congestion. He was managed in coronary case unit and he showed clinical improvement. Subsequently, he underwent investigations including blood, ECG, Chest X-ray, Echocardiography which revealed LVEG of about 35% with regional valve motion abnormality and coronary angiography which revealed borderline left main disease and a patent stent in circumflex artery. The Medical Board of AIIMS broadly agreed that no further immediate intervention is required, however he should continue with medical follow up and UTP patient Yamthong should continue with medical management at present and accordingly the UTP patient Yamthong Haokip was discharged from AIIMS, New Delhi and referred back to JNIMS, Imphal.

Submitted for favour of information and further necessary action please.

Encl: As above.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/-

( S.Touthang)

Superintendent

Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa."

"ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (CARDIO-THORACIC & NEURO SCIENCES CENTRE

Ansari Nagar, New Delhi 110029

No. 3-16/2019/01.ME.AMS (CNC) Date: 26.03.2019

Subject: Report of the Medical Board constituted regarding treatment of UTP Mr. Yamthong Haokip, MLA, Govt. of Manipur admitted on 10.03.2019 under Cardiology Department, Private Room No.4010, CTC, AIIMS, New Delhi. (The case was referred from Govt. of Manipur, vide letter No.6/87(1)18-(J)(M)(CONF)/Pt. dated 06.03.2019 from Deputy Secretary, Home, Govt. of Manipur)

Mr. Yamthong was transferred from JNIMS, Imphal, to the AlIMS, New Delhi, on 10.03 2019 for medical treatment. Accordingly the Medical Superintendent, AlIMS got Mr. Yamthong admitted in C.T. Centre and constituted a medical Board consisting of the following members to decide in this matter

Dr. R. Narang, Professor, Cardiology

- Chairman

Dr. R Goswami, Professor, Endocrinology

- Member

Dr. Achal Srivastava, Professor, Neurology

- Member

Dr. R. Sagar, Professor, Psychiatry

- Member

Dr. A.K. Bisoi, Professor, CTVS

- Member

Dr. Ambuj Roy, Professor, Cardiology

- Member

The committee first met on 16.03.2019, evaluated Mr. Yamthong clinically and suggested investigations. Dr. Vineet Ahuja, Professor, Department of Gastroenterology was also co-opted as Medical Board member for his expert opinion. The members of the Medical Board met again or 26.03.2019, went through the reports and deliberated on the medical condition and future course of management.

Mr.Yamthong was found to have Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, Coronary Artery Disease, post PCI and post ICD. At the time of admission, he was found to be in pulmonary congestion. He was managed in the coronary care unit and he showed clinical improvement. Subsequently, he underwent investigations including routine blood, ECG and Chest X-ray. He also underwent Echocardiography and Coronary angiography. Echocardiography revealed LVEF of about 35% with regional valve motion abnormality. Coronary angiography revealed borderline left main disease and a patent stent in circumflex artery. The disease appeared similar to the coronary angiogram done about 6 months back cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery (CTVS) department was consulted and nitrate-augmented myocardial perfusion imaging scan was done. It showed a scar in the inferior wall with no evidence of hibernating myocardium. Considering different aspects, it is recommended the patient should continue on medical follow-up for the present. ICD (implantable cardioverter defibrillator) device interrogation was also done which did not reveal any significant finding.

Gastroenterology department was also consulted who advised ultrasound abdomen and CT scan of abdomen in view of a typical abdominal pain. These were found to be essentially normal. Endocrinology department was also consulted for diabetes mellitus and they advised treatment regarding blood sugar control and fundus examination for retinopathy. Insulin dose was adjusted and patient was advised to follow-up at local medical facility. Neurology department was consulted who did not find any significant evidence of peripheral neuropathy or any other neurological abnormality.

Psychiatry department evaluation was also done and they did not find any major psychiatric illness; however, patient was found to have adjustment reaction/disorder. He was advised appropriate management, following which he improved. Patient can continue follow-up at local medical facility.

Broadly it was agreed that no further immediate intervention is required and Mr. Yamthong should continue with medical management at present. Mr. Yamthong can be discharged from AlIMS and referred back to JNIMS, IMPHAL and is fit to travel by air. Full medical details and treatment to be taken are in the discharge summary being provided to the patient.

(Dr.R. R. NARANG)

Chairman,

(DR R. GQSWAMI)

Member,

(DR. ACHAL SRIVASTAVA)

Member,

(Dr. R.SAGAR)

Member,

(Dr.A.K.Bisoi),

Member

(Dr.Ambulroy)

Member,

(DR.VINEET AHUJA),

Member,

(DR.YAMUNA RANI)

Member Secretary"

The same are taken on record.

[5] Today when the matter is taken up, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant stated that on 16.4.2019, the learned Special Judge (NIA), Manipur passed an order on the bail application by co-accused number No.12. The appellant-accused is accused No.10. By that order, conditional bail has been granted to the co-accused.

[6] The main ground on which the learned senior counsel canvassed on the merits of the appeal as against the order passed by the learned Special Judge (NIA), Manipur is that the relevant medical records were not considered by the Court below and that the finding of tampering of witnesses was not well founded.

At this juncture, it was pointed out by Mr.Kh.Samarjit based on the reply affidavit dated 16.01.2019 that charge-sheet was filed against the 8(eight) persons on 25.9.2018 in which the name of the present appellant did not find place. The present appellant-accused was arrested for his complicity in the alleged offences and based on investigation which happened subsequent to his arrest, a supplementary charge-sheet has been filed on 25.01.2019. Reply affidavit dated 05.02.2019, page No.107 reads as follows:-

"4. That with reference to para Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 of the Rejoinder Affidavit filed by the Appellant, it is humbly submitted that the said paras are sufficiently dealt with by the Respondent i.e. National Investigation Agency in their Affidavit-in-opposition filed on 16-01-2019.

However, it is submitted that the Respondent i.e National Investigation Agency has already filed Supplementary Charge Sheet along with the supporting documents and material objects etc. on 25-01-2019 against the 4 (four) accused persons namely, Yamthong Haokip (who is the husband of the present Appellant), David Hangshing Thokchom Diamond Singh & Lhunkhoson Haokip @ Soson @ S S Haokip. The Special Court (NIA), Manipur, having seen the Supplementary Charge Sheet, has already taken cognizance of the offences against the said accused persons vide order dated 28-01-2019 passed in Special Trial (NIA) Case No. 1 of 2018 and the same is pending consideration before the Special Court (NIA), Manipur. And as directed by the Special Court (NIA), Manipur, the copies of the Supplementary Charge Sheet along with the supporting documents, etc. were furnished to the present Appellant (Wife of the accused person Yamthong Haokip) on 30/01/2019 in the Special Court, NIA premises at Cheirap Court Complex, Imphal."

He therefore pleaded that in view of changed circumstance and subsequent events, regular bail petition should be filed and pursued. This contention appears to be tenable in law.

[7] The appellant-accused, in view of changed circumstances, has to move a fresh bail application before the learned Special Judge (NIA), Manipur. The Gauhati High Court in (2012) 2 NEJ 218, Jibangshu Paul vs. National Investigtion Agency (NIA) emphasized the above legal position in paragraph Nos. 118 and 119 as below:-

"118. From the case of Hamida (supra), what cannot be ignored and must be treated as the law of the land is that bail is granted in respect of 'an offence'. Consequently, when an offence is one in respect whereof, the accused had never gone on bail, the accused must apply for bail irrespective of the fact as to whether the offence is bailable or non-bailable. If the offence is bailable, the accused would, as a matter of right, demand bail.

If the offence is non-bailable, the parameters for consideration for Crl. Appeal No. 29/2011 granting of bail would be governed by Section 437 if the Court is a Court of Magistrate or a Court other than the Court of Sessions or the High Court, such as, the Special Court, NIA.

119.

Consequently, in the present case too, when the offences under Sections 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 of the UA (P) Act, 1967 and Section 25(1)(d) Arms Act, were added in the charge-sheet filed against the accused-appellant, the accused-appellant ought to have, in the light of what has been laid down in Hamida (supra), applied for bail, on his appearance in the learned Special Court. In fact, the accused-appellant appears to have accepted this position of law inasmuch as he did apply to the learned Special Court, as already indicated above, for being allowed to go on previous bail. By legal fiction, the application, so made by the accused-appellant, amounted to the accused-appellant surrendering to the jurisdiction of the learned Special Court seeking bail in respect of the additional offences and once he had surrendered to the jurisdiction of the Special Court, (which the Special Court, indeed, had), the Special Court was bound to consider as to whether the accused shall or shall not, in the facts and attending circumstances of the case, be allowed to go on bail treating the accused-appellant to have come into its custody, for, the question of granting of bail would not arise without the accused having been fallen into the custody of the Court concerned. In a case of present nature, what consideration would prevail upon a Special Court Crl. Appeal No. 29/2011 would depend upon the penal provisions and also the facts and attending circumstances of the case. Nevertheless, the accused- appellant would be treated in the custody of the Court and it is, then, for the Court to decide on the basis of the penal provisions and the facts and attending circumstances of the case as to whether the accused-appellant deserves to be allowed to go on bail or not."

[8] The allegation of the appellant that the learned Court of NIA, Manipur did not consider the health grounds in a proper perspective and therefore, rejection of the bail appears to be without application of mind, cannot be accepted for the reasons that the Special Court had taken abundant caution to ensure that the accused, pending investigation, is treated at the best hospital in the country. Based on interim orders passed by this Court, the appellant-accused has been given best medical treatment at New Delhi and he is presently undergoing treatment at JNIMS, Imphal. The plea of bail on health grounds was rightly rejected.

[9] As has been pointed out by the respondents at the time when the application for bail was dismissed, there was a complaint of interference with the investigation and that has been recorded by the learned Special Judge (NIA), Manipur. The bail is rejected on the prima-facie consideration that the investigation may be hampered by third party interference. It was not that the bail application was rejected on merits. It was only for the purpose of ensuring proper investigation. Now that the charge-sheet dated 25.9.2018 and supplementary charge-sheet dated 25.01.2019 have been filed by impleading the present appellant as accused No.10 and the supplementary charge-sheet has also invoked various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 read with other provisions of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, Arms Act and Indian Penal Code. The bail petition has to be decided on merits. The appellant‟s plea for reversing the order of the Special

[10] The appellant-accused is entitled to move the Court of Special Judge (NIA), Manipur for regular bail on merits in view of the subsequent events and changed circumstances.

[11] We find sufficient reason in the order of the Court below while declining the bail. It was justified because the investigation was going on at that point of time and there was a plea of interference. No charge sheet was filed as against the present appellant then.

With the filing of the supplementary charge-sheet on 25.01.2019 and fact that the Special Court has taken into consideration other issues in the case of co-accused, it will be appropriate that the accused-appellant in this case should also move the Court below for regular bail.

[12] We find no error in the order of the learned Special Judge (NIA), Manipur which is under challenged. In the above given circumstances, the order of the Special Court is upheld. The appeal stands rejected giving liberty as above.

Sapam Charubala vs National Investigation Agency

Judgment