New Delhi: AIIMS' Medical Superintendent was asked on Thursday by a Delhi court to appear before it on Friday to explain if Rajya Sabha MP Amar Singh, undergoing treatment in the hospital after his arrest in the 2008 cash-for-vote scam, needs an attendant there.
   
Special Judge Sangita Dhinga Sehgal issued a notice to AIIMS MS Dr D K Sharma observing that he had failed to answer the court's query in his report to it.
   
"In the circumstances and in the interest of justice, let Dr D K Sharma, MS, AIIMS, appear in court on October 14 at 2.30 pm to clarify the position. The MS, AIIMS, shall also submit the entire medical record of the accused till date in order to decide the application in hand," said the court.
   
"Notice to D K Sharma, MS, has been handed to the Investigation Officer (IO)," it added, while directing the IO to serve the notice to the doctor in time.
   
The court had earlier directed AIIMS to furnish a report on Singh's plea seeking permission for having his wife Pankaja Singh and aide Praveen Kumar as his attendants at hospital on rotation basis.
   
The court had also sought the Tihar Jail authorities' replies to Singh's plea. The jail authorities had said jail manual does not allow an attendant for a prisoner in hospital.

The jail authorities, however, had said a family member of the accused could be allowed to attend on him if medical officer, under whose observation the patient is undergoing treatment, recommends it.
   
After the report by the jail authorities, the court had asked AIIMS to furnish the report in this regard.

The judge, while directing the MS to appear before it on Friday, said the report "does not seem to have answered the query" of the court.
   
During the brief hearing on the plea of the former Samajwadi Party leader, his counsel pressed for an attendant at the hospital.
   
Referring to the report by AIIMS, the judge, however, said, "They (AIIMS) are saying that we provide attendant to a patient as and when required."
   
On the persistent request of Singh's counsel, the judge also clarified it would act in accordance with the law.    

"The question is not what you (counsel) want. We are talking about the rules," the judge said.

(Agencies)