NARESH GAUR v. STATE (GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.
Delhi High Court dismisses plea by prisoner's son seeking disclosure of prisoner's complete medical records
The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Suraj Gaur, son of prisoner Naresh Gaur, seeking disclosure of the prisoner's medical records. It held writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked to obtain information about a third person, and the stated purpose was unclear.
Why it matters: The court held that a writ cannot be used to obtain a third person's information, and that disclosure to a relative could harm the prisoner.
Summary written with AI and checked against the judgment text. It is not part of the judgment; read the full text or PDF.- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Case number
- W.P.(CRL) - 3420/2026
- Date of judgment
- 2 November 2026
- Petitioner / Appellant
- NARESH GAUR
- Respondent
- STATE (GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.
- CNR
- DLHC010524982026
- Outcome
- Dismissed
W.P.(CRL) 3420/2026 Page 1 of 2 pages $~63 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 02.11.2026 # CNR No. DLHC010524982026 + W.P.(CRL) 3420/2026 NARESH GAUR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhyuday Dhasmana, Advocate.
versus
STATE (GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sangeet Sibou and Mr. Priyansh Raj Singh, Advocates.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. This writ petition has been filed by Suraj Gaur, claiming himself to be son of the prisoner Naresh Gaur. What the petitioner Suraj Gaur seeks is mandamus, directing the respondents to disclose complete medical records of the prisoner Naresh Gaur.
2. At the outset, in my considered opinion, the writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked to obtain information, that too related to a third person. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that personally he did not visit the jail to interview the prisoner Naresh Gaur and ascertain facts before filing this petition.
W.P.(CRL) 3420/2026 Page 2 of 2 pages 3. Besides, there is nothing to suggest that the prisoner Naresh Gaur is not on inimical terms with the present petitioner Suraj Gaur, though they are father and son. In such situation, divulging such information to petitioner Suraj Gaur can be detrimental to the prisoner.
4. There is also no clarity about the purpose for which the above information is sought. For, as and when a prisoner seeks bail or furlough or parole on his medical grounds, the records are always produced before the court. Learned counsel is not aware as to whether the information sought in the present writ petition is in order to enable him to seek any of those reliefs.
5. At this stage, during dictation of this order, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the purpose of filing this writ petition is that the petitioner is contemplating to file an application before the competent authority for premature release. But as rightly submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of ASC, the information about medical record of the prisoner would have no bearing on his contemplated request for premature release. Further, learned counsel appearing on behalf of ASC assures that the jail authorities have already been providing appropriate medical treatment to every prisoner including the petitioner and would continue to do so.
6. The present petition is dismissed.
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
NOVEMBER 2, 2026/ry