'Those Who Hit Doctors Don't Deserve The Bail' : Supreme Court
Summarized by AI; it may make mistakes. Check important info
Summarized by AI; it may make mistakes. Check important info
The Supreme Court on Tuesday strongly criticised the assault of doctors at a civic hospital in Maharashtra, observing that those who attack doctors are not entitled to bail. The remarks came during the hearing of a plea by Shiv Sena corporator Ramesh Mhatre, who is accused of assaulting doctors at a municipal hospital in Thane district in July.
Supreme Court Questions Assault On Doctors
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and AG Masih said incidents of violence against doctors inside hospitals cannot be taken lightly.
“Would you go in a hospital and hit just anyone? Those who assault doctors are not entitled to bail. They have no respect for the medical fraternity. Imagine the mental trauma caused when a mob attacks,” the court observed orally.
Mhatre, a corporator of the Kalyan-Dombivli Municipal Corporation, had approached the Supreme Court challenging the stringent conditions imposed by the Bombay High Court while granting him bail.
Bombay High Court Imposed Strict Bail Conditions
While granting bail to Mhatre on August 7, the Bombay High Court directed him to stay outside Maharashtra until the chargesheet is filed.
Among the other conditions, Mhatre was ordered to reside in Calangute, Goa, report to Anjuna police station three times a week and remain outside Maharashtra until the trial begins.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Mhatre, argued before the Supreme Court that the conditions imposed by the High Court were excessively stringent. He also questioned whether the High Court could impose a 10-day deadline for filing the chargesheet.
Rohatgi further argued that Mhatre had no personal animosity towards the doctors. The Supreme Court, however, pointed out that a video of the incident had already gone viral.
High Court Had Earlier Stayed Trial Court Bail
The Bombay High Court had taken suo motu cognisance of the incident following protests by doctors.
On July 18, it stayed the bail granted to Mhatre by the lower court, describing the order as “perverse”. The High Court had said the magistrate’s court had treated the matter too lightly and had failed to consider Mhatre’s criminal antecedents.
The High Court later granted Mhatre bail on August 7, observing that an elected corporator is expected to be “for the people and by the people”.
“If such an elected person assaults his own voters, then it is an assault on the fabric of the democracy itself,” the High Court had observed.
The court said bail could be granted after considering that the investigation was progressing quickly and the accused had already spent some time in custody.
State To Challenge Bail Order
During Tuesday’s hearing, lawyer Siddharth Dharmadhikari, appearing for the Maharashtra government, said the state was preparing to challenge the bail granted to Mhatre.
Prabhas Bajaj, appearing for the Indian Medical Association (IMA), also intervened in the matter and opposed the bail.
The Supreme Court said it would await the bail cancellation petition to be filed by the state and listed the matter for Monday.
What Happened At The Hospital?
The incident took place on July 6 at Shastri Nagar Hospital after family members of a pregnant woman allegedly accused hospital staff of delaying her treatment.
Mhatre and the other accused allegedly gathered at the municipal hospital and assaulted doctors.
The incident triggered protests by members of the medical fraternity and subsequently led the Bombay High Court to take suo motu cognisance of the matter.
