Read Time: 10 minutes

The Allahabad High Court recently, granted bail to a student, who was accused of violating the Covid-19 Vaccine clinical trial rules.

The Single Bench of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav observed that,

“Let the applicant, Sudhakar Yadav, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.”

The facts of the present case stated that, on February 16, 2021, the Medical Superintendent of CHC, Dadari through social media came to know about a free vaccination drive being held for public against Novel Coronavirus at Gopal Pathology Lab situated near Central Bank of India, GT Road, Dadari. The superior officer was informed about the matter, who then got it enquired by Dr Sanjeev Kumar and the Drug Inspector of Baghpat. The officers found that a free COVID-19 vaccination camp was being organised with the help of Nari Raksha Dal on the spot and a banner to this effect was also found on the spot.

It is further stated that when the investigating authorities entered into the Lab one person was seen injecting the vaccine, named Rijwan Ali and on quarry, it was informed that he and other accused persons named in the FIR are employee of the Flores Hospital, who have been authorized by the Hospital for vaccination but when the Inspecting team demanded the paper to this effect, nothing in this regard could be produced.

The Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that, “the applicant was innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He said the applicant is a student of fourth Semester of MSc Clinical Research studying in the Institute of Himgiri Zee University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand.”

It was further contended by the Counsel that the applicant is a student of fourth Semester of M.Sc. Clinical Research studying in Institute of Himgiri Zee University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand and that the course of M.Sc, Clinical Research is run by University, under the supervision of Institute of Clinical Research India (ICRI).

He stated that the applicant has neither violated the clinical trials rules, nor committed any offence by getting the volunteers convinced of vaccination in clinical trial.

The Counsel for the applicant also said that from the allegations made in the FIR, at the Gopal Pathology Lab signature of the volunteers on the consent letter for clinical trial vaccination has been obtained and nothing has been concealed in getting agreed the volunteers for vaccination and as such no offence under Section 420 IPC is made out and also no offence under Section 15(2) and 15(3) of the Indian Medical Council Act is made out against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since February 16, 2021.

The Additional Government Advocate opposed the application for bail.

Taking into account the factual matrix of the present case, the Bench observed that,

“On perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail. “

The Bench issued the following directions –

1. THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES ARE PRESENT IN COURT. IN CASE OF DEFAULT OF THIS CONDITION, IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT IT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PASS ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
2. THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
3. IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.  
4. THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANT IS DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
5. THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

[Case title – Sudhakar Yadav v. State of UP]