The Rouse Avenue Court has declined the plea of businessman Amit Katyal seeking extension of interim bail in a land-for-job money laundering case. He was granted interim bail in February this year but has now been asked to surrender before jail authorities. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has charged Bihar’s former CM Rabri Devi and her two daughters, among others, in the same case. The court has criticized the conduct of the ED in obtaining independent medical opinions, considering it a breach of privacy. The court has emphasized the right to privacy and data protection and has asked the ED director to ensure that officers are well aware of privacy rights.

The court has observed that the conduct of the ED in obtaining independent medical opinions on the health of the accused is a breach of privacy and overreaching the court. The court has declined Amit Katyal’s plea for extension of interim bail and has asked him to surrender before the jail authorities today. The court has recorded that the accused has been permitted normal physical activity and sufficient time has passed after his discharge following surgery at Medanta Hospital. The court has emphasized that there are no grounds to extend the interim bail any further.

The court has raised questions about the ED’s conduct in obtaining independent medical opinions without seeking the presence or consent of the accused or permission from the court. The court has criticized the sharing of the accused’s medical records with government hospitals and seeking opinions from doctors at private hospitals. The court has highlighted the right to privacy and data protection and the need for investigation agencies and courts to consider recent developments in the law.

The court has emphasized that the powers of the court in subjecting the accused to independent verification of his health at various hospitals or constituting medical boards are unfettered by any claim of privacy raised by the accused. However, the same leeway is not available to the agency. The court has cautioned the ED against similar approaches in the future and emphasized the need for restraint in exercising power. The court has also questioned the sharing of medical documents of the accused, considering it a breach of confidentiality.