Image used for representational purposes only.
| Photo Credit: Shashi Shekhar Kashyap
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (September 1, 2026) said it was inclined to cancel the bail granted to Shiv Sena corporator Ramesh Sukrya Mhatre, who is accused of assaulting three municipal doctors in Thane, observing that those who "have no respect for the medical fraternity" should not be out on bail. However, the court also said it would await a plea by the State government seeking cancellation of his bail before passing a formal order.A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and Augustine George Masih was hearing Mr. Mhatre’s plea challenging the Bombay High Court’s July 18 order staying the bail granted to him by the trial court, as well as its August 7 order imposing stringent conditions on his release, including that he remain outside Maharashtra until the commencement of the trial.The High Court had initiated suo motu proceedings after the trial court granted bail to Mr. Mhatre and his associates, expressing concern over the alleged assault on the doctors.Mhatre’s lawyer questions HC interventionAppearing for Mr. Mhatre, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi contended that the High Court had erred in interfering with the trial court’s bail order and questioned its decision to initiate suo motu proceedings against the grant of bail. He also objected to the manner of its initial intervention, pointing out that the bail order had been stayed without giving Mr. Mhatre an opportunity to be heard.“I can understand that the court will act. But you can’t act like this... No notice was given to me. Bail was already granted to me, and it was stayed without hearing me,” he submitted.The Bench, however, endorsed the High Court’s intervention and took a serious view of the alleged assault on the medical professionals.“This is a case where the High Court was fully justified in taking suo motu cognisance and staying the bail order... The medical fraternity was threatened like this. Absolutely not justified. You have no respect for the medical fraternity. You cannot imagine the trauma a person faces when a mob attacks,” the Bench remarked, adding that it was inclined to restore the High Court’s earlier order staying the bail granted to Mr. Mhatre.The Bench also noted that the alleged assault had been captured on video and that the footage had gone viral.“Last evening, while reading the file, I had made up my mind to uphold the first order [staying bail] and set aside the second order [granting bail],” Justice Nath remarked.Advocate Siddharth Dharmadhikari, appearing for the State of Maharashtra, informed the court that the State would file a special leave petition the same day challenging the High Court’s August 7 order. The Bench accordingly directed that the State’s plea, once filed, be listed along with Mr. Mhatre’s petition on September 7.The case stems from an incident on July 6, when Mr. Mhatre and others allegedly assaulted three doctors at the Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation-run Shastri Nagar Hospital in Dombivli in Thane district. The alleged assault followed the doctors’ advice to move a pregnant woman to another facility as all beds in the hospital’s neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) were occupied.Strict bail conditionsAfter the High Court stayed their bail on July 18, Mr. Mhatre and the other accused surrendered the following day and were lodged at Aadharwadi Jail in Kalyan. On August 7, however, the High Court granted bail to Mr. Mhatre and some of the other accused subject to stringent conditions.The High Court directed them to remain outside Maharashtra until the commencement of the trial, while permitting them to enter the State for the framing of charges. They were also directed to stay away from the complainant doctors.In its August 7 order, a Bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad had also taken a serious view of the allegations against Mr. Mhatre as an elected representative.“In a rule of democracy, the principle is that an elected representative is by the people and for the people. If an elected representative is accused of assaulting his own voters, such a situation is bound to dent the fabric of democracy,” the High Court had observed. Published - September 01, 2026 09:00 pm IST
