The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday expressed its leaning towards revoking the bail granted to Ramesh Mhatre, a Shiv Sena corporator, who is embroiled in a case related to the alleged assault on medical professionals at a Dombivli hospital. This arises from the legal proceedings titled Ramesh Sukrya Mahatre vs High Court of Judicature at Bombay.
Initially, the Bombay High Court had intervened to halt a trial court’s decision to grant Mhatre bail. However, in a subsequent development on August 7, the High Court reversed its stance, allowing Mhatre’s release under strict conditions. Among these conditions, Mhatre is required to remain outside Maharashtra until the police file a chargesheet. Additionally, the High Court set specific timelines for both the investigation and trial processes.
Mhatre has since approached the Supreme Court, challenging the directives issued by the High Court. The case was heard by a Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and Augustine George Masih. During initial discussions, the Supreme Court conveyed its inclination to nullify the bail. Nonetheless, the Bench decided to defer its final decision, awaiting the Maharashtra government’s application for bail cancellation.
Justice Vikram Nath remarked, “Last evening, while reviewing the file, I was inclined to uphold the High Court’s initial order staying Mhatre’s bail and overturn the subsequent order granting his release on bail. Let us wait for the State’s petition seeking bail cancellation.” The Court was informed by the Maharashtra government’s counsel that a petition for the cancellation of Mhatre’s bail would be submitted within the day.
The charges against Mhatre stem from an incident on July 6, 2026, when he allegedly assaulted doctors and staff at the Kalyan-Dombivli Municipal Corporation’s Shastri Nagar Hospital. Although a sessions court initially granted him bail on July 14, the Bombay High Court, taking suo motu notice, stayed the bail order after a special session on July 18.
As the legal battle continues, Mhatre’s legal representative, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, contested the High Court’s approach, asserting that the intervention was inappropriate. Rohatgi argued against the imposition of a condition requiring the chargesheet’s submission within ten days, questioning its validity.
In response, the Supreme Court indicated its support for the High Court’s initial intervention, emphasizing the necessity of protecting the medical community from such threats. The Bench underscored the seriousness of the issue, stating, “The medical fraternity is being threatened. You cannot enter a hospital and assault individuals indiscriminately.”
Despite Rohatgi’s claim of Mhatre’s lack of personal enmity towards the doctors, the Court retorted, “Your video is already viral.” The Supreme Court has scheduled the hearing of Mhatre’s plea for September 7, allowing time for the Maharashtra government to file its bail cancellation plea, which will also be considered on the same date.
