Doctors Assault Case | Supreme Court Sets Aside Shiv Sena Corporator Ramesh Mhatre's Bail, Says 'Strong Message Needed'

A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta directed Mhatre to surrender within three days.

The bench orally remarked that a strong message must be sent and the medical fraternity cannot be attacked in this manner. "The message must go loud and clear. Medical fraternity cannot be touched and attacked in this manner," Justice Mehta said.

The Court was hearing the Maharashtra government's appeal challenging the Bombay High Court's August 7 order granting bail to Mhatre.

Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave for Mhatre submitted that his client had already spent 19 days in custody and argued that the cancellation of bail required a higher threshold to be met.

He also submitted that the trial had commenced before a Magistrate's court, with two prosecution witnesses already examined and the complainant, a woman doctor, scheduled to depose on October 3. He argued that Mhatre had cooperated with the investigation and trial and there had been no obstruction to the proceedings. He further pointed out that it is a magistrate-triable case and the court ordinarily grants bail in magistrate-triable cases.

The Court remarked that Mhatre's release could adversely affect the trial, particularly in view of the allegations against him and the prosecution's submissions.

Mhatre and four other accused have been charged with offences including assaulting public servants, voluntarily causing hurt, rioting, criminal intimidation and intentional insult, along with offences under the Maharashtra Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage or Loss to Property) Act, 2010.

Dave pointed out that the main offence invoked against Mhatre carried a maximum punishment of five years' imprisonment and submitted that the case was triable by a Magistrate.

The Court questioned whether more serious offences could be invoked against Mhatre.

Dave also argued that the 19 criminal cases cited against Mhatre were politically motivated and he had been acquitted in 18 of them.

The Court also highlighted another assault incident on medical personnel in Palghar involving Shiv Sena workers, pointing to repeated incidents involving members of the same political organisation.

Dave clarified that Mhatre was not involved in the Palghar incident. The Court, however, observed, "Same organisation. You are the leader. You are responsible. Same ideology. Nobody from any other ideology does this."

The Court also referred to Mhatre's criminal antecedents and the alleged assault on three doctors, including a woman doctor, at the hospital.

Dave urged the Supreme Court to exercise restraint, submitting that it was the highest court of the land and routinely granted bail in cases involving offences triable by Magistrates.

The Court, however, maintained that attacks on healthcare professionals warranted a strong response. It also refused to interfere with the High Court's order setting a timeline for an expedited trial.

The Court ultimately allowed the State's appeal and set aside the High Court's order granting bail to Mhatre.

Background

The case stems from an incident on July 6 involving a nine-month pregnant woman who, according to the petition, was in acute labour and had allegedly been kept waiting for several hours. Mhatre has claimed that he reached the hospital after repeated calls from the woman's family and an altercation subsequently took place with hospital staff. An FIR was registered on July 7, naming Mhatre as Accused No. 1.

A Magistrate in Kalyan granted bail to Mhatre on July 14 taking into account his age, medical condition, lack of flight risk and the fact that the principal CCTV evidence had already been secured.

The Bombay High Court, on July 18, following the protests by doctors, took suo motu cognisance and stayed the bail order, directing him to surrender. After two weeks, the High Court granted him bail.

Mhatre filed an SLP challenging the July 18 order as well as the stringent conditions subsequently imposed by the High Court in the August 7 order, including directing him to reside in Calangute, Goa, report three times a week at Anjuna Police Station and remain outside Maharashtra until commencement of trial. He also challenged directions concerning a fast-track trial, forensic examination, filing of the chargesheet and appointment of a Special Public Prosecutor.

The Court questioned Mhatre over the assault of doctors at the Shastrinagar Hospital in Kalyan, observing that attacks on medical professionals inside hospitals could not be treated lightly. On September 7, the Supreme Court expressed concern over another alleged assault on doctors in Palghar involving Shiv Sena workers. The Court observed that attacks on medical professionals appeared to be recurring among persons belonging to the same organisation.

Mhatre then withdrew his challenge to the stringent bail conditions. The Supreme Court, however, issued notice on the State's appeal challenging the grant of bail and granted Mhatre three weeks to file his response.

The Court also expressed its inclination to set aside the High Court's order granting bail, while observing that the High Court was justified in taking suo motu cognisance of the matter and staying the Magistrate's bail order.

Today, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order granting bail and directed him to surrender within three days.

Case no. - Crl.A. No. 004604 / 2026

Case Title - STATE OF MAHARASHTRA vs. RAMESH SUKRYA MHATRE