Delhi HC asks Unitech's Ramesh Chandra to surrender, refuses to extend interim bail in ED case

The Enforcement Directorate opposed any extension of the interim bail, stating that as per the report of an AIIMS medical board, his sickness was not life-threatening and treatment was feasible in jail.

The Delhi High Court on Friday refused to further extend the interim medical bail granted to realty firm Unitech’s founder Ramesh Chandra in a money laundering case and asked him to surrender before the jail superintendent on Saturday.

Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta observed that the petitioner was embroiled in serious offences involving diversion of over Rs 5,000 crore belonging to home buyers, who were "duped" and are now shelterless. He cannot claim bail as a matter of right for treatment only at a specialised hospital of his choice, he said.

The judge, however, directed the jail superintendent to ensure that requisite medical treatment is provided to Chandra as per jail rules so that his life is not imperiled in any manner. "In the facts and circumstances, petitioner is directed to surrender before the Superintendent Jail on 16.03.2024 and interim bail is extended till then," the court said. "Superintendent Jail is further directed to ensure that in case of any aggravation of medical condition of the petitioner or if the circumstances so warrant, the petitioner shall be immediately referred to G.B. Pant Hospital or any other specialized government hospital for necessary treatment, ensuring the provision of necessary medical facilities as per jail rules," ordered the court.

It clarified that the petitioner shall be evaluated at least twice a week for continuity of medical treatment. Chandra was initially granted an eight-week interim bail on July 28, 2022, by the high court which was extended from time to time as there was no improvement in his condition. Chandra’s counsel sought a further extension of the interim bail because he was over 85 years of age and suffered from poor health which required continuous monitoring and treatment.

The Enforcement Directorate opposed any extension of the interim bail, stating that as per the report of an AIIMS medical board, his sickness was not life-threatening and treatment was feasible in jail. The court observed that for a grant of bail on medical grounds under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the sickness has to be serious and life-threatening, and such treatment must be required that cannot be provided in the jail hospital or in custody.

"Petitioner, who was one of the Directors of Unitech Limited, is involved in serious offences, involving diversion of funds to the tune of about Rs.5,826 crore belonging to home buyers, who stand duped and are shelter less," the court observed. "In view of medical opinion, the petitioner cannot claim bail as a matter of right for treatment only at a specialized hospital of his choice," it said.