The Bombay High Court on Monday directed the Maharashtra government to inform the court by August 13 whether advocate Pradeep Gharat is willing to resume his role as the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) in the high-profile case of Dr Payal Tadvi, who allegedly died by suicide in 2019 due to alleged harassment by her senior colleagues.
Tadvi, a postgraduate student at BYL Nair Hospital, had reportedly been subjected to severe caste-based abuse and ragging by three senior doctors Bhakti Mehare, Ankita Khandelwal, and Hema Ahuja before her tragic death on May 22, 2019. Gharat had been handling the case since its inception, and his removal as SPP by the state government has sparked significant controversy.
Mother Challenges State’s Decision, Citing Risk of Trial Delay and Evidence Loss
Abeda Tadvi,Tadvi’s mother, had challenged the state’s decision in the HC arguing that the removal was “arbitrary and illegal.” She further stated that this decision could delay the trial and risk losing crucial evidence.
The court expressed concerns about the state’s handling of the case. It remarked: “These are testing times. These cases are where prosecutors are truly tested.” The bench noted that Gharat had been a dedicated and seasoned prosecutor, questioning the reasoning behind his removal, especially after his success in securing convictions in several cases.
Gharat’s Success in Securing Convictions Highlighted by Court
Notably, in February, Gharat had successfully moved an application before the sessions court to include Dr. Yi Ching Ling, the then Head of the Gynaecology Department at BYL Nair Hospital, as an accused. He argued that Dr. Ling ignored complaints of ragging and caste-based harassment against Tadvi, a member of the Tadvi Bhil Scheduled Tribe. Based on this, the trial court ordered Dr. Ling’s addition as an accused on February 28. Dr. Ling has challenged this order before the HC, which is pending.
The Maharashtra government had replaced Gharat with Advocate Mahesh Mule in March 2023. However, Abeda Tadvi’s petition seeks Gharat’s reinstatement, claiming that the removal violates the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and risks derailing the case. “The state has not provided any legitimate reasons for the removal,” her advocate Lara Jesani argued.
Court Criticises State for Lack of Proper Coordination and Explanation
After going through the State’s affidavit, the bench remarked it was not in good taste, which mentioned that there was lack of coordination.
“If u feel there is some lack of coordination, can’t you meet him and say there is a problem in coordination? Or you sit in your ivory towers and decide? He has put in 30-40 years (of practice as an advocate). Put yourself in his shoes and see how it feels,” Justice Ghuge remarked, adding that the state had not cited even a single instance of lack of coordination.
On a query whether Gharat would return as SPP, Jesani said they had communicated with him and he had expressed his willingness to return.
Public Prosecutor Seeks Time to Take Instructions on Gharat’s Resumption
At this point, public prosecutor S Gavande sought time to take instructions.
The trial is yet to begin. Meanwhile, the three accused doctors are out on bail but still face charges under the SC/ST Act and the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act.
