Complaints before the Commission Death of Jagannath Paoji Ingule—Failure on the part of the medical officer to diaffiose at an appropriate time: Maharashtra (Case No. 16102/96-97/NHRC) The undertrial prisoner, Jagannath Paoji Ingule, aged 44 years, was received in Nasik Road prison from Thane Central Prison on 7 May 1995. After nearly one-and-a-half years of undertrial custody, he complained of a swelling in the abdomen and general weakness. He was admitted in the prison hospital on the same day, from where he was referred to the Civil Hospital for expert opinion. Later, he was again admitted in the prison hospital with amoebic dysentry and severe anaemia, and was referred to the Civil Hospital, Nasik, for further treatment. On 3 February 1997, he expired in the Civil Hospital, Nasik. The inquest report could not arrive at any conclusion on the cause of death. The post mortem report revealed that the prisoner was suffering finm an advanced stage of pulmonary and abdominal tuberculosis. The post-mortem report stated the probable cause of death as cardio-respifatory arrest due to 'pulmonary tuberculosis and plural effusion' and 'abdominal tuberculosis and ascitis and anaemia'. The Commission considered it unfortunate that the disease was not diagnosed, even though the undertrial prisoner was in custody for more than one-and-a-half years. He was being treated for amoebic dysentery, while he was actually suffering from an advanced stage of tuberculosis—pulmonary as tvell as intestinal—a fact which was revealed in the post-mortem, and which could have been diagnosed before the illness reached serious proportions. The Commission held that access to adequate, timely and proper medical diagnosis and treatment is an inherent right of prisoners, tvhose freedom to seek and have access to medical aid outside tlie prison and on their ovm is curtailed by law. It further observed that diagnosis and treatment oftuberculosis is not any more a sophisticated area of medicine. With the laige-scale manifestation of this infectious'ailment in the jails, any jail medical staff should reasonably be expected to know, or ought to have known, the diagnosis of the case that had been admitted. While holding that there was negligence in the protection of the prisoner's human right to life and that the dependants of the victim were entitled to immediate interim relief under Section 18(3) of the Protecdon of Human Rights Act, 1993, the Commission recommended that: (i) an immediate interim relief of Rs. 1 lakh be paid by the State Government to the dependants of the deceased; and (ii),the State Government should make a comprehensive appraisal, for the control of the spread of tuberculosis and other infectious diseases in the prisons, and to install, wherever lacking, adequate diagnostic facilities. The Commission has received a compliance report with regard to the payment of Rs. 1 lakh as compensation. 119