Uttarakhand High Court

Short-term bail was extended to permit urgently required angioplasty and follow-up care.

DILBAGH SINGH vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Uttarakhand High CourtJUDGMENT: October 16, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Short-term bail was extended to permit urgently required angioplasty and follow-up care.. DILBAGH SINGH vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND. Uttarakhand High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant had been granted short-term bail for four weeks from his release on 25 September 2026 to undergo coronary angiography

Source reference: para. 5

After experiencing chest pain and other symptoms, he underwent angiography on 13 October 2026. The report disclosed serious blockages in multiple coronary arteries, and angioplasty was recommended for 23 October 2026—the date his short-term bail was due to expire

Source reference: paras. 6–11

He sought a further two weeks of bail to undergo angioplasty and receive immediate follow-up care, undertaking to surrender when the extended period ended

Source reference: paras. 13–14

The informant opposed the application, but did not dispute that angiography had occurred and angioplasty had been recommended

Source reference: para. 15
02

Issues

1. Whether the applicant’s short-term bail should be extended to permit him to undergo the medically recommended angioplasty and receive immediate follow-up care

Source reference: paras. 13, 16–17

2. Whether the extension should be made subject to surrender after the extended period and notification to the Court

Source reference: para. 18
03

Law Applied

The Court cited no statute, precedent, or specific legal test.

Source reference: no citation

It applied the principles reflected in its short-term bail order: where an immediate medical requirement is supported by the record, and refusal of an extension may threaten the applicant’s life, the Court may extend short-term bail on humanitarian grounds, while requiring the applicant to surrender at the end of the extension

Source reference: paras. 16–18
04

Reasoning

The angiography disclosed serious coronary blockages, and the treating doctor had recommended angioplasty requiring hospital admission on 23 October 2026, the date the applicant’s bail expired

Source reference: paras. 10–11, 16

Given the urgency of the treatment and the potential threat to the applicant’s life if immediate medical attention were unavailable, the Court considered the informant’s objection insufficient to defeat the application

Source reference: paras. 15–17

It therefore granted a limited extension while preserving the requirement that the applicant return to custody afterward

Source reference: paras. 17–18
05

Holding

The Court allowed the time-extension application and extended the applicant’s short-term bail by two weeks from its expiry on 23 October 2026, to enable the angioplasty and related care

The applicant was directed to surrender before the court concerned when the extended period expired and to inform the High Court of his surrender

Source reference: para. 18
Uttarakhand High Court

Original Court PDF

DILBAGH SINGHvsSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Uttarakhand High Court · October 16, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment