Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail to Doctors in Silicosis Case Due to Prosecution Delays

New Delhi, India Aug 25, 2026 ALN: Jaipur: The Rajasthan High Court has granted bail to three government doctors accused in the Dausa silicosis certificate case, in which a wrongful payment of Rs 12.43 crore was found to have been made in 413 cases, holding that with the charge sheet already filed and the trial unable to commence for want of sanction for prosecution, the delay was not of the accused’s making but attributable to the prosecution.

Justice Arun Monga observed that the investigation qua the petitioners stood concluded, that the prosecution case rested substantially on digital and documentary material already seized and within the control of the investigating agency, and that their continued detention on an unfounded apprehension of tampering would serve no meaningful investigative purpose.

On the question of delay, the Court recorded:

The three petitioners sought to be enlarged on bail in FIR No. 60/2024, registered at Police Station Kotwali (Dausa), District Dausa, for offences under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Dr Devinarayan, posted as Chief Physician (Medicine) at the Government District Hospital, Phalodi, and Dr Manoj Kumar, Junior Specialist (Chest Physician) at the Government District Hospital, Banswara, were arrested on Mar 30, 2026; Dr Prem Kumar, Junior Specialist (Medicine), was arrested on Apr 01, 2026. Their bail applications before the Additional Sessions Judge, Dausa were dismissed by orders dated Apr 08, Apr 10 and Apr 24, 2026.

The prosecution case, as noticed by the Court, arose from a report submitted on Jan 29, 2024 by Dr R. C. Meena, Chief Medical Officer, Dausa. As per the list annexed to that report, 2,453 silicosis certificates had been issued in District Dausa by the doctors and radiographers concerned. A committee constituted by the Principal of S.M.S. Medical College, Jaipur, comprising Dr C. P. Sawarkar, Dr Mukesh Mittal and Dr Sunil Jakhada, examined the matter and by letter dated Nov 20, 2023 reported serious irregularities in the certificates.

Certificates had been issued to persons who were not suffering from silicosis, while certificates of persons actually suffering from silicosis were rejected. Irregularities were also found in the X-rays uploaded by the radiographers. On the basis of that report, the Commissioner and Joint Secretary to the Government, Department of Specially Abled Persons, found that a wrongful payment of Rs 12.43 crore had been made in 413 cases through the auto renewal process.

Counsel for the petitioners contended that the entire certification process is conducted digitally on the New Silicosis Portal 2022 and that the workflow is strictly compartmentalised, the foundational medical evidence consisting of the X-ray uploaded by the radiographer and the opinion recorded by the radiologist, in the generation or alteration of which the petitioners had no role. It was submitted that the prosecution case itself proceeds on the footing that the portal has an auto approval mechanism under which, once the radiologist certifies a case as positive for silicosis, the case is automatically routed to the identity of the Medical Officer, who has no technical functionality to override that positive opinion and no statutory authority or independent discretion to reject it. The role attributed to the petitioners was, therefore, ministerial and mechanical, performed in compliance with the prescribed digital workflow.

It was further submitted that the decision to sanction and disburse financial assistance rests with the Social Welfare Board or Department concerned, which exercises its own administrative and expert oversight, and that there was no material to show that the petitioners derived any pecuniary benefit, no illicit money or alleged commission having been recovered from them. On the apprehension of tampering on which bail had been declined below, counsel submitted that the prosecution case rests substantially on digital records, portal data, IPDRs, uploaded X-rays, auto approval logs and other documentary material, all of it already in the custody of the investigating agency and beyond the petitioners’ technical reach. The Public Prosecutor opposed the applications, submitting that if any concession were granted, misuse thereof could not be ruled out.

Declining to record any finding on culpability, the Court observed that the submission on absence of culpability was a matter of trial, and that while “there may be some substance in a few of the arguments advanced”, no definitive opinion could be recorded at that stage and none was recorded. It found no material to suggest that the petitioners were a flight risk or were likely to tamper with the evidence, noting that their mobile phones and SIM cards had been seized at the time of arrest and that the crucial digital evidence already stood seized by the investigating agency, “equally within its control and beyond the reach of petitioners”.

Allowing the three bail applications by a common order dated Aug 24, 2026, the Court directed that the petitioners be released on bail on each furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs 50,000 with two sureties of Rs 25,000 each, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court or the Duty Magistrate, for their appearance in trial whenever called upon to do so till its conclusion. It clarified that the observations made were confined to the disposal of the bail applications and that the Trial Court “shall proceed with the trial uninfluenced by any of them”.

Title: Devinarayan v State of Rajasthan

Case No.: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5878/2026, connected with S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application Nos. 6832/2026 and 7956/2026

Citation: 2026:RJ-JP:34118

Counsel for petitioners: Mr. Adeet Shrivastava, Mr. Tapeshwar Singh Parmar for Mr. Rajesh Goswami; Mr. Sudhir Jain; Mr. Pankaj Gupta; Mr. Naman Yadav

Counsel for respondent: Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, Public Prosecutor