The Supreme Court, while declining to release on bail Abdul Nazir Maudany, accused in the Bangalore bomb blast case, directed the Karnataka government on Tuesday to provide him necessary medical facilities.
A Bench of Justices P. Sathasivam and J. Chelameswar disposed of the petition after hearing senior counsel Sushil Kumar and J.L. Gupta, appearing for Mr. Maudany and senior counsel M.N. Krishnamani and Anita Shenoy, for the Karnataka government.
When Mr. Sushil Kumar said Mr. Maudany, who had to undergo amputation of one of his legs and was suffering from serious spinal problems and associated symptoms, was no threat to the law enforcing agency, Mr. Justice Sathasivam told him in a lighter vein, “he need not go anywhere, he can do wonders by sitting in one place.”
Mr. Krishnamani opposed Mr. Maudany's bail plea and providing treatment in Kerala, stating that he was involved in a number of cases and posed a threat to security. Similar treatment was available in Bangalore itself.
“On going through the material, we are not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail,” the Bench said in its order. “However, taking note of the fact that the petitioner is a disabled person having lost one leg, even the [Karnataka] High Court, while rejecting the petition for bail, directed the State to provide him better health facilities and also directed the jail authorities to take all necessary steps to see that the health condition of the petitioner does not deteriorate and provide required medical help.
Directive to jail authorities
“Considering the directions made by the High Court as well as this Court on May 13, 2011 and in view of the grievance expressed by Mr. Kumar and Mr. Gupta, senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, the petitioner may be treated by Kottakkal Vaidya Sala at Bangalore itself. Though the senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has prayed that the petitioner may be taken to Malappuram [Kerala-State] for further treatment, we are not inclined to accept such suggestion, since Mr. Krishnamani has stated that similar facilities are available at Bangalore. In view of the same and in addition to the earlier directions, we also direct the jail authorities to provide better treatment to the petitioner by taking him to Kottakkal Vaidya Sala available at Bangalore itself. The petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court for further direction if need arises.”