CHANDER PRAKASH WADHWA v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI), Supreme Court Of India, Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Factual and Procedural Background

The petitioner faces custody in two separate matters: (i) a case registered by the Economic Offences Wing, Delhi, and (ii) a subsequent case initiated by the Directorate of Enforcement under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The petitioner was previously granted interim bail in the first matter owing to medical concerns. During that period, he was arrested in the PMLA case and has remained in custody since.

The Trial Court, by order dated 27 May 2022, rejected his application for bail in the PMLA proceedings. The petitioner did not pursue a higher challenge to that rejection. Earlier, on 30 March 2022, this Court had considered and rejected a request for interim bail on medical grounds after obtaining a four-member Medical Board report from King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, which indicated the petitioner’s condition was stable.

Relying on fresh medical certificates—particularly one issued by the Senior Medical Officer, Central Jail No. 11, Mandoli—the petitioner renewed his plea for bail on health grounds in the present writ petition. The certificate records significant coronary artery blockages and trigeminal neuralgia requiring specialist attention.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the petitioner’s updated medical condition justifies relief on bail/medical grounds in the PMLA case.

Whether, in light of the new medical material emerging after the Trial Court’s order of 27 May 2022, the petitioner should be permitted (a) to file a fresh bail application before the Trial Court, or (b) to re-assail the earlier bail rejection order on both merits and medical grounds.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court observed that:

The petitioner’s health-based request for bail had previously been examined on 30 March 2022, when a Medical Board concluded his condition was “quite stable,” leading to rejection of interim bail.

The latest medical certificate—produced after the Trial Court’s 27 May 2022 bail order—details substantial arterial blockages and ongoing neurological pain. Because this new evidence was unavailable to the Trial Court, a fresh judicial evaluation is warranted.

Balancing the need for updated medical assessment with procedural propriety, the Court decided the appropriate course is to remit the question to the Trial Court. It expressly authorised the petitioner (i) to file a fresh bail application predicated on the new medical evidence, or (ii) to impugn the earlier bail rejection order on both merits and medical grounds. The Court further empowered the Trial Court to constitute a fresh Medical Board—mirroring the earlier four-member panel—should medical clarification be required.

Holding and Implications

Writ Petition DISPOSED OF with liberty to the petitioner to seek fresh or further bail relief before the Trial Court, which shall consider the matter afresh on its own merits and may order a new Medical Board examination.

Immediate Effect: The petitioner gains a procedural avenue to re-approach the Trial Court for bail based on updated medical data. Broader Implications: The decision does not establish new precedent; it simply clarifies that subsequent, materially different medical evidence can justify a renewed bail application or challenge to a prior bail denial.

CHANDER PRAKASH WADHWA v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

1. The petitioner is arrested in two cases. The first was lodged by the Economic Offences Wing, Delhi and, the second has been lodged by the Directorate of Enforcement for the offences punishable under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

2. In the first case, because of his medical condition, the petitioner was granted the facility of interim bail for a while. During the period of said interim bail, the petitioner was arrested in connection with the second case by the Directorate of Enforcement and has since then been in custody.

3. The application for bail was moved in connection with the second case and as the Order dated 27.05.2022 annexed as Annexure P-16 shows, the prayer for bail was rejected by the Trial Court.

4. We have been apprised that no further challenge in that behalf has been raised by the petitioner.

5. At an earlier point in time, this Court had the occasion to consider the prayer for relief of interim bail on medical condition and the matter was dealt with by this Court vide order dated 30.03.2022. In that matter, the Report from the Medical Board consisting of at least four medical professionals from King George's Medical University, Lucknow, was called for by this Court and after examining the Report, it was found that the medical condition of the petitioner was quite stable. In light of said Report, the request for interim bail was rejected by this Court.

6. Relying on certain certificates including one given by the Senior Medical Officer, Central Jail No. 11, Mandoli, New Delhi, prayer for bail on medical condition is now made. Paragraphs 5 and 6 of said Report state as under:

“5. The medical records related to heart of the inmate reflected about 80 percent blockage in one left artery and 90 percentage blockage in another artery along with 50 percent blockage in third artery. He has history of high BP and high Cholesterol for which he is taking medication since long time. Cardiology department of King George Medical College advise for angiography (cardiac intervention) on 18.09.2021 but not be done. He has problem of difficulty in breathing and chest pain while walking so he was sent to RML Hospital and examined by cardiologist and advised routine blood investigations, ECHO and angiography. His blood investigations has been done but report is awaited. They also advised medication that provided to him from jail dispensary. He has also family history of heart disease so proper treatment and investigation require in time to prevent any heart attack. At present his problem is not improving.

6. The medical report of inmate says that he is also suffering from trigeminal neuralgia. Neurologist of Ganga Ram Hospital treated to him and later on King George Medical College and advised to avoid heat and directed air flow over face. His MRI report showed a small vascular loop present in relation to cisterna segment of fifth cranial nerve. On dated 03.10.2022, he was sent to RML Hospital in neurology department. Neurologist examined to him and advised to medications (Carbarnazepine and Pregalin-NT) in increased dose as compared to previous dose. But pain in over face is still persisted. That also advised to cure dental issue, which are triggering it and take precautions from exposures of direct air/cold/heat. He needs to walk with same precautionary due to frequent neurological pain attack.”

7. Since the Report, as stated above, was given well after the disposal of the bail application by the Trial Court in the matter concerning offences under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, we direct as under:

a. The petitioner is entitled either to file fresh application for bail on the projected medical ground before the Trial Court or may raise the challenge to the Order dated 27.05.2022 on the grounds of merits as well as the projected medical condition of the petitioner.

b. The matter so filed shall be considered purely on its own merits and if necessary, the concerned Court may have the benefit of examination of the petitioner by a Medical Board consisting of four medical professionals as was done by this Court on the earlier occasion.

8. With these observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of.

/ 0

CHANDER PRAKASH WADHWA v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Factual and Procedural Background

Legal Issues Presented

Arguments of the Parties

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

Holding and Implications

CHANDER PRAKASH WADHWA v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Comments