The Supreme Court on Tuesday, September 1 questioned the manner in which the Bombay High Court had intervened in the bail granted to Shiv Sena corporator Ramesh Sukrya Mhatre in a case involving alleged assault of doctors and hospital staff at a municipal hospital in Dombivli.
A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and Augustine George Masih, however, also took serious note of the allegations and indicated that the bail issue should be considered after the Maharashtra government formally seeks its cancellation.
Background of the Case
The case relates to an incident reported on July 6, 2026, at Shastri Nagar Hospital, run by the Kalyan-Dombivli Municipal Corporation. An FIR was registered against Mhatre following allegations concerning an altercation with doctors and hospital staff.
A Sessions Court granted him bail on July 14. The Bombay High Court subsequently took suo motu cognisance, meaning it initiated proceedings on its own, and stayed the bail order during a special sitting on July 18.
The High Court later lifted the stay on August 7 and granted Mhatre bail subject to stringent conditions. These included staying outside Maharashtra until the chargesheet was filed, reporting to police and completing the investigation and trial within specified timelines.
Mhatre challenged both High Court orders before the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Questions High Court’s Procedure
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Mhatre, argued that the High Court had improperly interfered with an already granted bail order and had done so without giving his client an opportunity to be heard.
He also questioned the direction fixing a strict deadline for filing the chargesheet.
“There cannot be a condition requiring the chargesheet to be filed within ten days. How can such a condition be imposed?”
The Bench indicated that it would examine the procedural issues raised by Mhatre.
At the same time, the judges made it clear that the allegations involving medical professionals could not be ignored.
“You are an elected representative. The High Court was completely justified in taking suo motu cognisance and staying the bail order.”
Court Takes Serious View of Hospital Incident
The Bench referred to the alleged assault and the video footage connected with the incident.
“The medical fraternity is being threatened like this. Who will come to the aid of the people at large? These kinds of people do not deserve it. They have no respect for the medical fraternity.”
The Court also observed that hospitals could not become places where individuals could enter and assault people at random.
Rohatgi maintained that Mhatre had no personal animosity against the doctors. The Bench, however, referred to the video material already available in the case.
Maharashtra Asked to File Bail Cancellation Plea
The State of Maharashtra, represented by Advocate Siddharth Dharmadhikari, informed the Court that it would file a formal plea seeking cancellation of Mhatre’s bail.
The Supreme Court decided to consider that plea along with Mhatre’s challenge to the Bombay High Court orders.
The matter was accordingly directed to be listed on September 7, 2026, with the State’s bail cancellation plea to be taken up on the same day if filed.
Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court did not finally decide the bail challenge on Tuesday. It directed Maharashtra to place its cancellation plea before the Court and ordered that the matter, along with the State’s challenge, be heard on September 7, 2026.
Case Details
Case Title: Ramesh Sukrya Mhatre v. High Court of Judicature at Bombay
Case Number: SLP(Crl) No. 16040-16041/2026
Judge: Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Augustine George Masih
Decision/Hearing Date: September 1, 2026
-300x169.webp)
