The recent bail application hearing showcased a comprehensive legal analysis by the Court, emphasizing the need to carefully consider all aspects of the case. The Court’s decisions on stringent bail conditions and trial proceedings shed light on the complexities of the legal system and the importance of upholding legal standards. Find out more about the detailed legal analysis in this intriguing case.
Facts
- The Appellants were arrested on 29.05.2019.
- Bail Application No.1338 of 2019 preferred by the Appellants was rejected by the Court of Sessions (Gr. Bombay) at Bombay by order dated 24.06.2019.
Also Read: Analysis of High Courts’ Jurisdiction and Court Orders Under Article 142
Issue
- During the hearing of the appeal for bail, the Court inquired about the recording of statements of material witnesses under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Also Read: Electoral Malpractices in Mayor Election
Arguments
- Appellants are not accused of serious criminal offenses like Section 302 or 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
- The extreme actions of the deceased Dr. Payal may indicate her inability to cope with pressures in the medical profession.
- The appellants’ counsel argues that due to the above reasons, they should be granted bail.
- Petitioners have completed two out of three years of their course and request to be allowed to finish the program.
- They seek permission to either return to the same college or be accommodated in another institution to complete their studies.
- Maharashtra Medical Council regulations prohibit migration to another college for Post Graduation for the petitioners.
- The petitioner cited two examples in support of the submission mentioned in paragraph 10 of the order.
- The observation in paragraph 10 assumes that charges had to be framed.
- It was suggested that the decision on whether charges need to be framed should be left to the concerned court for consideration.
Also Read: Balancing Power and Transparency: Electoral Bonds Struck Down, Disclosure Mandated
Analysis
- The High Court relaxed certain conditions imposed on the students pursuing Post Graduation at B.Y.L. Nair Charity Hospital.
- Licenses of some students were suspended by the Maharashtra Medical Council, affecting their ability to practice as medical professionals.
- Interim Applications were filed seeking relaxation of conditions imposed by the High Court.
- Statements of material witnesses were recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
- Possible hostility towards the accused applicants was noted during the proceedings.
- Mental injury can lead a person to extreme steps like suicide.
- Mental injury is serious and can be more severe than physical injury.
- The intention of the appellants to drive Dr. Tadvi to suicide will be decided by the Trial Court.
- Considering the above points, the appeal should be allowed.
Decision
- The appellants shall report to the office of Crime Branch, Nagpada every alternative day till framing of charge.
- The licences of the appellants issued by Medical Council of India as well as Maharashtra Medical Council shall remain suspended till conclusion of the trial.
- The suspension of Dr. Ankita Kailash Khandelwal and Dr. Bhakti Arvind Mehare was revoked by the Maharashtra Medical Council on 16.03.2020.
- The appellants shall not leave Mumbai without permission from the Court.
- Breach of any imposed condition may lead to cancellation of bail.
- Enlargement on bail is allowed with stringent conditions including furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- each.
- The Special Judge (Special Court SC and ST) is directed to conclude the recording of evidence within ten months from the date of framing of charge.
- The appellants must furnish solvent local sureties to the satisfaction of the Special Court, Mumbai within 8 weeks.
- An undertaking regarding specific clauses must be filed in the trial Court within two weeks from the date of release.
- The appellants must attend the trial Court on every date, unless exempted by the trial Court.
Case Title: ANKITA KAILASH KHANDELWAL Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (2020 INSC 581)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000660-000662 / 2020
