Politicians who hit Doctors don't deserve to roam on Streets: Supreme Court
New Delhi: Expressing concern over the growing number of incidents of doctors being beaten by members of political parties in Maharashtra, the Supreme Court on Monday issued directions to the State Government to take such politicians immediately into custody.
"These people don't deserve to roam on streets", the Apex Court Justice Sandeep Mehta was quoted as observing by Live Law.
This observation was made by the top court bench while hearing the bail plea of a Shiv Sena corporator in connection with an alleged instance of attack on doctors at a Kalyan-based hospital. The petitioner has challenged the Bombay High Court order dated 18.07.2026 staying the bail granted to him and its August 7 order imposing stringent bail conditions. The HC bench had issued the orders after initiating suo motu proceedings following the grant of bail to the petitioner and his associates by the Magistrate.
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta observed that such incidents appeared to be recurring among the petitioner's associates.
Also Read: Bombay HC grants bail to Shiv Sena Corporator, 3 others in Dombivli doctors' assault case
Further, the bench pointed out that just yesterday, another similar incident was reported involving the same group of people. As per the latest media report by the Times of India, the Apex Court's observation was regarding the incident where Shiv Sena office-bearers alleged assaulted doctors and other staff at a private healthcare facility based in the Palghar district of the State. Reportedly, the incident took place early on Sunday over the discharge of a person who was injured during the Dahi Handi festival.
Already, Palghar Police have booked at least 17 people in this connection and the list includes members of the Eknath Shinde-led faction. CCTV footage showed one of the accused slapping a receptionist and threatening a woman employee. According to a complaint lodged by an employee of the hospital, Shiv Sena district chief Kundan Sankhe, city chief Rahul Gharat and others had entered the hospital's emergency department and started arguing with the doctors. When the receptionist tried to intervene, she was slapped, as can be seen in the CCTV footage. Some of the party members reportedly barged into the Intensive Care Unit of the hospital.
Referring to this instance of violence against doctors and healthcare workers, the Apex Court bench observed, "There seems to be a propensity amongst the peers of the petitioner."
"Mr. Rohatgi, things are going from bad to worse. There was an incident yesterday. Same group of people, again assaulting doctors", the bench further noted.
As per the latest media report by Live Law, slamming the acts of political party members assaulting the healthcare staff, Justice Sandeep Mehta observed today, "How can this be justified that you go and assault them inside, just beat them brutally? It's an issue of law and order. So they should be actually detained. That's what our feeling is. These people don't deserve to roam on streets."
Last week, while considering the matter, the Apex Court had observed that attacks on medical professionals inside hospitals could not be treated lightly. Back then, the top court bench had indicated its inclination for upholding the Bombay High Court order dated July 18 staying the bail granted to the petitioner, who was booked for assaulting three doctors at the Kalyan-Dombivli Municipal Corporation run hospital.
During the hearing of the case today, the counsel for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohtagi submitted that he had instructions for withdrawing the SLP against the bail conditions.
However, the top court bench reiterated that such assault on doctors was a serious issue and decided issuing notice on the Special Leave Petition filed by State of Maharashtra challenging the grant of bail to the petitioner.
Referring to the Bench's observation regarding the incident of violence yesterday, petitioner's counsel denied that the new hospital violence was by the "same group" and also requested the bench to grant a quietus to the issue of bail. He said, "Virtually by the impugned order, he will be convicted. There's nothing left by that. The order says file a charge sheet within one week, new judge be appointed."
In response, Justice Mehta noted, "Let him be (convicted)...What's wrong? Let the trial be expedited. What is wrong?"
However, pressing for a quietus to the issue of bail, Rohtagi submitted, "Under the impugned order, his fate is clear. I am just saying, put a quietus to that."
At the outset, the bench observed that while it could not prevent the petitioner from withdrawing the SLP against bail conditions, it would hear the State's SLP against the bail.
"No, no, we'll make it even clearer, don't worry. We cannot stop you from withdrawing your petition. We will allow you to withdraw it," observed Justice Nath.
"Let the message go. Message needs to go not only to these people, but it should work as a deterrent for everyone," he further added.
Ultimately, the Apex Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw his plea against the stringent bail conditions. However, it also issued notice on the SLP filed by the State Government against the order granting bail to him. The bench also granted three weeks of time to the petitioner to file counter in the State's plea and listed the matter after that.
Case Background:
The petitioner's bail plea arose from an incident dating back to July 6, 2026 and involved a nine-month pregnant woman. According to the petition, the patient was in acute labour and had allegedly been kept waiting for several hours. The petitioner claimed that he reached the hospital after getting repeated calls from the family of the patient and subsequently, an altercation took place with the hospital staff. Consequently, an FIR was registered on July 7 and the petitioner was named the main accused.
Medical Dialogues had also reported on the incident. Two on-duty doctors were allegedly assaulted inside a civic-run hospital in Maharashtra's Thane district after advising the family of a newborn to shift the infant to another medical facility due to a shortage of beds in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU).
According to hospital authorities, the dispute began after a woman underwent a caesarean section for childbirth. Doctors found that the newborn required specialised care as the umbilical cord was wrapped twice around the baby’s neck. However, the hospital’s only emergency Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) was already occupied by another critically ill newborn.
The doctors assured the family that arrangements would be made to shift the newborn to another KDMC hospital with NICU facilities, but the relatives refused and insisted on treatment at Shastrinagar Hospital.
Hospital officials alleged that the patient's relatives later contacted the corporator. When doctors attending to other patients could not respond to his calls, the corporator allegedly arrived at the hospital along with several associates.
The CCTV footage allegedly showed the group entering the hospital premises and attacking the two gynaecologists. The doctors also alleged that they were verbally abused and threatened during the confrontation. One doctor sustained injuries, while two nurses who intervened to protect the doctors were allegedly pushed and manhandled. The corporator, however, expressed regret over the incident but denied assaulting the female doctor.
Following the incident, the matter was brought to the attention of Municipal Commissioner Abhinav Goyal, after which a police complaint was registered against the corporator and his associates.
Doctors across the Kalyan-Dombivli region launched protests demanding immediate action and said they would not resume routine services until a case was registered and arrests were made. Police subsequently reviewed the CCTV footage and arrested the corporator.
Following this, the petitioner was granted bail by a Magistrate in Kalyan on July 14. The bail was granted after taking the petitioner's age, medical condition, lack of flight risk into account and also after taking note of the fact that the principal CCTV evidence had already been secured. However, the Bombay High Court, taking suo motu cognizance of the issue, stayed the bail order and directed the petitioner to surrender. Later, the HC bench granted him bail, but imposed stringent bail conditions.
