Bombay High Court
GODFREY THOMAS ALVARESversusTHE NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court converted the interim application into a separate appeal and granted the appellant temporary bail for three months with conditions, on humanitarian grounds.
Summary
Godfrey Thomas Alvares, accused in an NIA case for organized human trafficking, suffered a serious cardiac ailment while in custody and applied for interim bail, which was rejected by the Special Judge. He filed Interim Application No.2309/2026 challenging the bail denial, arguing that his health required urgent coronary artery bypass surgery, preferably in a private hospital of his choice. The NIA opposed the bail, contending that treatment could be provided in a government hospital. The High Court, considering the appellant's critical health condition and humanitarian grounds, ordered the conversion of the interim application into a separate appeal and granted temporary bail for three months with strict conditions, including surrender after the period and reporting to the investigating agency. The court also directed that the main appeal (Criminal Appeal (Stamp) No.13579/2026) and related interim application on condonation of delay remain pending for later consideration.
Issues considered
- Whether an interim application challenging a bail denial can be converted into a separate appeal under the NIA Act.
- Whether bail should be granted on humanitarian grounds given the appellant's serious cardiac condition.
- Whether the appellant may undergo surgery in a private hospital of his choice while on bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 120B, 201, 323, 342, 347, 370, 371, 384, 420, 506
- National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 — s. 21(4)
Subjects
- bail
- interim application
- conversion of application
- humanitarian bail
- NIA
- organized trafficking
- cardiac surgery
- Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
- Section 21(4) NIA Act
- health grounds
Judgment
SMITA Digitally signed by SMITA
JOHNSON GONSALVES
JOHNSON Date: 2026.07.23
GONSALVES 15:31:51 +0530
sg 5.apealst13579-26.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2309 OF 2026
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 13579 OF 2026
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 13579 OF 2026
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2307 OF 2026
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 13579 OF 2026
Godfrey Thomas Alvares … Appellant
versus
The National Investigation Agency And Anr. … Respondents
----
Mr. Zoheb Shaikh, a/w. Mr. Yash Vora, for the Appellant.
Mr. Chintan Shah, S.P.P., a/w. Mr. Rohan Chaughule, for Respondent
No.1/NIA.
Mr. Akhilesh Singh, PI, NIA., Mumbai, is present.
Ms. Gauri Rao, APP, for the Respondent/ State.
Dr. Aman Pandey, Chief Medical Officer, Bombay Central Prison, is
present.
----
CORAM: SARANG V. KOTWAL &
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ.
DATE: 22nd JULY, 2026.
Page 1 of 10
__________________________________________________
22nd July, 2026
sg 5.apealst13579-26.docx
P.C.:
1. Interim Application No.2309 of 2026 is an application in a
pending Criminal Appeal (Stamp) No.13579 of 2026. The said appeal
is filed beyond the period of limitation, and hence, there is another
Interim Application No.2307 of 2026 for condonation of delay in
preferring the appeal. The aforesaid appeal is preferred against the
order dated 6th December, 2024 passed below Exhibits 9 and 10 by
the Special Judge under NIA, in NIA Special Case No.1225 of 2024.
The appeal is preferred under Section 21(4) of the National
Investigation Agency Act, 2008.
2. However, the present Interim Application No.2309 of 2026
challenges the order dated 4th July, 2026 passed below Exhibit 91 in
the NIA Special Case No.1225 of 2024. The said order is also passed
by the Special Judge under NIA Act, Greater Mumbai.
3. This application is filed on urgent basis because of the serious
health condition of the Applicant.
4. Heard learned Counsel Mr. Zoheb Shaikh for the
Page 2 of 10
__________________________________________________
22nd July, 2026
sg 5.apealst13579-26.docx
Appellant/Applicant, learned S.P.P. Mr. Chintan Shah, for Respondent
No.1/NIA and learned Addl. P.P. Ms. Gauri Rao, for the
Respondent/State.
5. Learned S.P.P. Mr. Chintan Shah appearing for the Respondent
No.1-NIA specifically submitted that instead of an Interim
Application, the Applicant ought to have preferred an appeal under
Section 21(4) of the NIA Act. The said Section 21(4) provides for
filing of an appeal against the order of the Special Court granting or
refusing bail. In the present application, the order dated 4 th July, 2026
is challenged. The said order is different from the order dated 6 th
December, 2024 which is the main order challenged in the pending
appeal, i.e. Criminal Appeal (Stamp) No.13579 of 2026.
6. Considering the urgency in the matter, instead of permitting the
Applicant to withdraw this application and file a separate appeal, we
direct the Registry to convert the Interim Application No.2309 of
2026 in Criminal Appeal (Stamp) No.13579 of 2026 into a separate
appeal. It shall be separately numbered.
Page 3 of 10
__________________________________________________
22nd July, 2026
sg 5.apealst13579-26.docx
7. Before referring to the present subject matter of this proceeding,
a brief reference can be made to the merits of the matter. We are
making it clear that we are not passing any order on the merits of the
matter but we are deciding this appeal on humanitarian grounds
considering the health status of the Appellant. The allegations against
the Appellant who is shown as Accused No.2 in
R.C.02/2024/NIA/MUM registered with National Investigating
Agency under Section 120B, 201, 323, 342, 347, 370, 371, 384, 420
and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, under Section 24 read with 10 of
the Immigration Act; are that the Appellant, along with the Accused
No.1 Jerry Jacob, were indulging in running of an Organized
Trafficking Syndicate by luring and trafficking Indian youths to foreign
countries and forcing them to work in fake call centers.
8. While in custody, the Appellant suffered very serious heart
ailment, and therefore, he preferred an application vide Exhibit 91 in
Special Case No.1225 of 2024 in the Trial Court for his release for a
temporary period.
9. The said application was rejected, and hence, the present
Page 4 of 10
__________________________________________________
22nd July, 2026
sg 5.apealst13579-26.docx
Application (to be converted into an Appeal) is filed. In the order
dated 4th July, 2026, the learned Judge had reproduced the report of
the Chief Medical Officer of Mumbai Central Prison dated 2 nd July,
2026. The said report mentions that the Applicant/Appellant had
complaints of left-sided chest pain and sweating on 15 th June, 2026.
His ECG showed ST-T changes and Trop-T was faint weakly positive.
He was referred to Sir J.J. Hospital. He was admitted from 15 th June,
2026 till 17th June, 2026. He was diagnosed as a case of Acute
Coronary Syndrome with Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial
Infraction with Ejection Fraction of 60%. His Coronary Angiography
was done on 16th June, 2026. It revealed Triple Vessel Disease. He
was advised Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting. However, the
Appellant was not willing to undergo the procedure, and therefore, he
was kept on medication. He was provided adequate assistance from
Mumbai Central Prison Hospital. He was advised to consult Medical
Officer of Mumbai Central Prison for any complaints.
10. The Trial Court considered his report and the prayer made by
the Appellant for his interim bail for three to six months. The
Investigating Agency NIA opposed this application. The learned Trial
Page 5 of 10
__________________________________________________
22nd July, 2026
sg 5.apealst13579-26.docx
Judge observed that there was a Special Ward for prisoners in Sir J.J.
Hospital, Mumbai. The prisoners undergoing medical treatment could
remain in that ward for any length of period till they got cured.
Considering all these facts and, particularly taking into account the
fact that the Jail Authority was prompt and diligent to provide proper
medical aid to the Applicant/Accused, the Trial Judge rejected the
Appellant’s prayer for interim bail for three or six months. The
learned Trial Judge gave directions by observing that the Appellant
was entitled to get each and every medical treatment as per the advise
of the Chief Medical Officer of the Mumbai Central Prison and the
Medical Officer of Sir J.J. Hospital, Mumbai. It was further directed
that as and when required, the Appellant was to be provided with
medical treatment forthwith at Sir J.J. Hospital or at a proper
place/hospital, as per the Rules and as per the health requirement of
the Applicant/Accused.
11. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that considering
the serious nature of the required surgery, the Appellant was not
willing to undergo the surgery at the above hospital, instead he
wanted himself to be treated in a private hospital and he wanted to
Page 6 of 10
__________________________________________________
22nd July, 2026
sg 5.apealst13579-26.docx
undergo surgery in a private hospital. Learned Counsel, on
instructions, stated that his family has already consulted a Surgeon at
Karuna Hospital, Borivali, and the Appellant/Applicant would be
taking treatment from that hospital and would be undergoing surgery
at that hospital as per advise of a private Surgeon attached to Karuna
Hospital, Borivali.
12. Learned Addl P.P. submitted that instead of granting interim bail
to the Appellant, the same surgery can be performed at Sir J.J.
Hospital. Learned Counsel for the NIA submitted that the same
treatment is available at Sir J.J. Hospital, and therefore, interim bail
cannot be granted to him.
13. We have considered these submissions and the health status of
the Appellant. We had called for a fresh report in that behalf.
Accordingly, a copy of the report dated 22 nd July, 2026 signed by the
Head of Department of Sir J.J. Hospital is produced before us. It is
taken on record and marked “X” for identification. The report
mentions that the Appellant is diagnosed to have Ischemic Heart
Disease with Triple Vessel Disease and is receiving treatment for the
Page 7 of 10
__________________________________________________
22nd July, 2026
sg 5.apealst13579-26.docx
same. The patient was planned for urgent Coronary Artery Bypass
Grafting. The report further mentions that finances were required for
the same and the Appellant’s Ration Card and Aadhar Card were
called.
14. The report itself shows that the Appellant is in urgent need of
Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting which is a major surgery procedure
involving the heart. The Appellant's health condition is, thus, serious
requiring urgent surgery. Therefore, it is quite reasonable for the
Appellant and his family to select a Surgeon of their choice to perform
the surgery. Considering that this is a potential life threatening
ailment which requires a serious and delicate surgery, we are also of
the opinion that the Appellant be permitted to undergo the surgery to
be performed by a Surgeon of his choice. Therefore, we are inclined
to grant temporary bail to the Appellant on certain conditions. We are
inclined to grant bail for a period of three months which would
include the period for consultation, actual surgery and post surgery
treatment and care.
15. Hence, the following order:
Page 8 of 10
__________________________________________________
22nd July, 2026
sg 5.apealst13579-26.docx
ORDER
(i) The Appellant is directed to be released on bail for
a period of three moths from his actual release on
his furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-
with one or two sureties.
(ii) After his release from prison, he shall surrender to
the Prison Authorities at the end of three months
period from his actual release.
(iii) The Appellant shall inform the Investigating
Agency about his actual treatment and details of
surgery. He shall also inform the Investigating
Agency about the contact numbers and the place
where he would be taking treatment and would be
residing.
(iv) The Investigating Agency is at liberty to send their
Officers at those places to verify whether the
Appellant is really taking that treatment.
(v) The Appellant shall not try to contact any
witnesses directly or indirectly.
Page 9 of 10
__________________________________________________
22nd July, 2026
sg 5.apealst13579-26.docx
(vi) The passport of the Appellant is already with the
Investigating Agency. He shall not try to get
another passport and leave the Country.
(vii) The Appellant shall not leave the area of Mumbai
and Greater Mumbai.
(viii) The Investigating Agency is at liberty to seek
reports from the Doctors concerned regarding
treatment of the Appellant.
(ix) The present Appeal/Application is disposed of. It
is made clear that the other appeal, i.e. Appeal
(Stamp) No.13579 of 2026, along with the
connected Interim Application No.2307 of 2026,
shall be considered after his surrender in the
prison.
(ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
Page 10 of 10
__________________________________________________
22nd July, 2026
Checking your session…