CHAPTER 4 corroboration from many other co-prisoners. But from the statements of witnesses, it is established that Rajiv was the person at whose instance prisoner Som Dutt was taken to the dispensary and Rajiv was with the deceased and he helped the jail staff to take the deceased to the dispensary. The statement of Rajiv Sharma indicates that deceased was not feeling well since mid day and he was assured by a guard that he would be sent to Bikaner if any vehicle comes, but no vehicle came till 9 pm. At that time the deceased felt pain in his head and when there was no response, Rajiv started shouting. Then, 15 minutes later the guards came and he himself assisted the deceased being taken to the dispensary and the patient was made to lie on the bed with severe pain without any treatment. As a result, the deceased became un-conscious. Thereafter, Rajiv was forcibly taken back to his barrack. The materials on records indicate that on 10.2.2013 at 10.30 p.m., the deceased complained of chest pain and he was referred to Government Hospital Sriganganagar immediately and the patient died at 11.40 p.m. during treatment. But this is contrary to the detailed report by the Superintendent, Central Jail which claimed that when the patient was referred to the District hospital with a complaint of chest pain the patient was declared brought dead. The self conflicting postures of the Superintendent, Central Jail, Sriganganagar is, prima facie, a testimony of an attempt to suppress his own negligence in assisting the prisoner to get the appropriate treatment. At the outset, it is seen that the prisoner was a young man of only 28 years of age at the time of his entry into Jail and his health condition was normal as per the health screening report. Undisputedly, the prisoner was admitted to Sriganganagar Hospital on 8th February 2013 and remained in the hospital till 10.02.2013. A medical advice was given to the Jail staff to get the prisoner have an echo test for further evaluation of the patient’s condition. Notwithstanding the said fact, the patient was discharged from the hospital on 10.2.2013. Here, two questions arise: i) When the doctors felt that Echo test is required, how could they discharge the patient without such test being taken in the hospital? ii) How can the jail officials ignore such advice and failed to have an echo test? It is admitted fact that the deceased was a heart patient and he had been admitted to the hospital for an effective treatment and for recovery from the ailment but the way he was received and discharged from the hospital authorities was a mere ritual under the pretext of a medical care. Right to medical care of a prisoner is a fundamental as well as a human right. The negligence shown to him by the hospital and the jail authorities is a clear instance of violation of the human rights of the deceased prisoner. National Human Right Commission Annual Report - 2014-2015 31