Documented post-operative complications justify extending interim bail on medical grounds.

The petitioner, an accused in FIR No. 197/2026 registered at P.S. Malviya Nagar under Sections 105, 326(g), 324(5), 125(a), 125(b) and 287 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, sought an extension of medical interim bail granted on 21 September 2026. That bail was due to expire on 22 October 2026.

He relied on medical records, including an ultrasound report and a doctor’s prescription dated 9 October 2026, to assert that he was experiencing post-operative complications; counsel also submitted that he had been readmitted to Batra Hospital and was 59 years old and diabetic.

The State opposed the application, citing the gravity of the offence and the absence of documentation establishing readmission.

1. Whether the petitioner’s medical evidence and alleged post-operative complications justified extending his interim bail.

2. Whether the extension should be subject to conditions, including verification of the medical documents and surrender after the extended period.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, empowers the Court to grant bail.

Relying on Mukesh Kishanpuria v. State of West Bengal, (2010) 15 SCC 154, the Court noted that the power to grant regular bail includes the power to grant interim bail, particularly in light of Article 21 of the Constitution.

It also relied on Arvind Kejriwal v. Directorate of Enforcement, (2024) 9 SCC 577, which reproduced Athar Pervez v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2016 SCC OnLine Del 6662, for the principle that interim bail may be granted temporarily in compelling circumstances, including intolerable grief or suffering, even where regular bail may not be justified.

The Court considered the ultrasound report and the doctor’s prescription dated 9 October 2026 and found that they indicated post-operative complications.

Although the State disputed that the petitioner had been readmitted, the medical material before the Court, together with counsel’s submissions regarding his age and diabetes, supported temporary relief on medical grounds. Applying the principles governing interim bail and the need to account for compelling circumstances, the Court extended the existing interim bail rather than determining any entitlement to regular bail.

It directed the Investigating Officer to verify the medical documents and permitted the State to seek cancellation if any document was not genuine or the petitioner’s condition had been misrepresented. The petitioner was directed to surrender to the Jail Superintendent upon expiry of the extended period.

The application was disposed of accordingly.