Rakesh Wadhwan’s Bail Plea Rejected By Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court refused to grant bail to Rakesh Wadhawan, promoter, Housing Development Infrastructure Limited (HDIL), being accused for money laundering in the Punjab and Maharashtra Cooperative Bank Ltd. multi-crore fraud case. Wadhawan was seeking bail on medical grounds.
 
He is currently admitted at KEM hospital and requested a transfer to a private hospital, due to lack of cardiac care facility.
 
The Public Prosecutor opposed the request stating that another government Hospital has the facility for pacemaker implantation and that the accused can be shifted if necessary.
 
Justice Nitin Sambre noted that applicant was receiving the best possible treatment at well-known government/corporation hospital and further observed that “It cannot be inferred that the right of the Applicant guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution for having proper medical treatment in super-speciality hospital is violated. Rather, various medical treatment which are given to the applicant are proved to be lifesaving at this stage“.
 
Wadhawan was accused of money laundering in the multi-crore Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative (PMC) Bank fraud case. As a result of which he is facing prosecution by both the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Economic Offences Wing of the Mumbai Police in the case.

Case Details: Criminal Bail Application No. 2591 of 2021

Rakesh Kumar Wadhwan vs. The State of Maharashtra

Related articles

Rakesh Wadhwan’s Bail Plea Rejected By Bombay High Court

It cannot be inferred that the right of the Applicant guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution for having proper medical treatment in super-speciality hospital is violated. Rather, various medical treatment which are given to the applicant are proved to be lifesaving at this stage

Does Failure In Avoiding Collision In Itself Constitute Contributory Negligence?

“To   establish   contributory negligence, some act or omission, which materially contributed to the accident or the damage, should be attributed to the person against whom it is alleged.” 

How the term “reasonableness’ can be read where the legislation itself is silent about the restricted time period for moving no confidence motion?

Whether any restriction is to be read into Section 56 of the Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1993, for moving no confidence motion against the elected Sarpanch, after election.

Habeas Corpus petition sustainable against a remand order?

If the remand is absolutely illegal or the remand is afflicted with the vice of lack of jurisdiction, a Habeas Corpus petition would indeed lie. Equally, if an order of remand is passed in an absolutely mechanical manner, the person affected can seek the remedy of Habeas Corpus. Barring such situations, a Habeas Corpus petition will not lie.

Can High Court entertain a writ petition, notwithstanding the existence of Arbitration Clause in the contract?

The High Court may entertain a writ petition, notwithstanding the availability of an alternative remedy.

Latest articles

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here