Supreme Court cancels bail of Corporator accused of assaulting doctors, cites unexplained reversal and antecedents

The Supreme Court cancelled the bail of an elected municipal Corporator and three others accused of assaulting and verbally abusing doctors on duty in a hospital labour ward in Kalyan, Maharashtra, over a dispute about shifting a patient in labour. The Bombay High Court had taken suo motu cognizance, stayed a magistrate's bail order and directed the accused to surrender, then later restored their bail on conditions. The State argued this reversal lacked any fresh justification. The Supreme Court agreed, holding that once a High Court records a prima facie finding that bail was wrongly granted, any later reversal of that view requires cogent, discernible reasons — mere passage of custody time or progress in investigation is not enough.

The Court held that an accused's criminal antecedents are a material factor in deciding bail, citing Ash Mohammad v. Shiv Raj Singh, and found the High Court had ignored the primary accused's eighteen prior criminal cases, including under Sections 302 and 307 IPC. The Court emphasised that doctors must be able to discharge their duties without fear of intimidation, and that an elected office carries no licence to override the rule of law. Bail was cancelled, with liberty to seek it again if circumstances change, and the trial court was directed to protect witnesses under the Maharashtra Witness Protection and Security Act, 2017.