Back
Grants to Obese ED Accused Citing Qualitative Difference in Treatment
The on granted to Ushik Mahesh Gala, an accused in a Rs 137 crore money laundering case investigated by the , holding that there is a ` received as an especially in and and as a .' Justice Milind N. Jadhav found that Gala’s , which led to three surgeries within four years, brought him squarely within the exception carved out by the .
Case Background: Three Surgeries in Four Years
Gala was arrested by the ED in in connection with ECIR/MBZO-I/14/2024, arising from a predicate offence registered by the . He had previously been arrested by the EOW in and enlarged on bail. His medical history included a bariatric surgery (sleeve gastrectomy) in , a gall bladder removal on , and an abdominal hernia repair on . After the hernia surgery, his treating doctor, Dr. Rahul Borude of Bariatrics by Borude, advised complete bed rest until November 2026 for post-operative rehabilitation.
Gala had been granted in for the gall bladder surgery, with extensions, but his request for six months of was rejected by the in , leading him to approach the High Court.
Arguments: vs. Medical Necessity
Appearing for Gala, and argued that the applicant’s progressively worsening health—including severe abdominal cramps, hernia, and risks of port-site infection due to obesity—placed him under the , which exempts a `' person from the stringent for bail. They relied on precedents including , where the held that obesity itself is a disease and a root cause of other ailments.
Opposing the plea, contended that Gala’s conditions were not life-threatening and could be managed at the or government facilities. He argued that post-operative dyspepsia and sarcopenia are standard recovery features and do not amount to acute illness requiring bail. According to the ED, the under Section 45(1)— and —remained unsatisfied.
Legal Analysis: and Precedents
Justice Jadhav examined medical reports from , , and Dr. Borude. A report dated , warned that Gala’s compromised immune system put him at risk of fatal infection, while a report recommended close clinical observation at home.
Rejecting the ED's submission, the court noted that
obesity is not a mere disease or life condition but an underlying cause for further medical complications.' Drawing from ** (), the judge held that once an accused falls within the term
' in the proviso, the need not be fulfilled. The court also cited
() for the proposition that continues even if the accused later recovers.
Key Observations from the Court
“There is a received as an especially in and and as a .”
“Perusal of the material on record bring home the conclusion that sickness, infirmity and health conditions of Applicant are severe and hence directing Applicant to return to custody or even the prison hospital upon his discharge, is incompatible with his health conditions.”
“Obesity is not a mere disease or life condition but an underlying cause for further medical complications which can affect overall health and lifestyle.”
The court also took of `jail conditions and the enormity of congestion in jails' as factors weighing against sending Gala back to custody.
Decision and Conditions
Justice Jadhav allowed the bail application on medical grounds, directing Gala’s release upon furnishing a of Rs 2,00,000 with one or more . The order imposes several conditions:
- Gala and any co-accused named by him must attend investigation on the first and third Monday of every month for three months, with Gala joining later as required.
- The investigating officer may visit Gala’s home with two days’ notice to monitor rehabilitation.
- Gala must not leave the country, tamper with evidence, or communicate with co-accused.
- He must surrender his passport and report any change of address or mobile number.
The court further directed Gala to present himself at every six months for a check-up, with the dean’s committee to report on his health to the prosecution. The prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of bail if conditions are breached or based on the hospital report.
Justice Jadhav concluded by noting that the order is `primarily considered on medical grounds' and is subject to revocation if Gala or other accused fail to cooperate with the investigation.
