Casual approach of courts while dealing with attacks on health personnel leads to increase in such violence: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently observed that the casual approach adopted by courts when dealing with instances of attacks on healthcare personnel contributes to the increasing frequency of such violent incidents [Dr. PK Ashokan v State of Kerala & Anr.]..Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas noted that despite the existence of various laws relevant to the issue, and repeated orders from courts to treat attacks on healthcare personnel as a serious crime, doctors and healthcare workers still face threats when a mishap occurs to a patient.“The trembling hands of a surgeon and the shivering mind of a physician do not augur well for the patients at large. Doctors continue to face threats when a mishap occurs to a patient. Even for the slightest provocation, health personnel is attacked. Despite legislation prevailing in the State of Kerala and the repeated court orders to treat attacks on health personnel as a serious crime, violence against them recurs. The casual approach adopted by the courts while dealing with instances of attacks on health personnel also contribute to the tendency to resort to such violence,” the order said..The Court was considering a case filed by a doctor challenging the order of the Sessions Court granting anticipatory bail to two accused persons who allegedly injured him and destroyed some property at his hospital. The two accused persons were booked for offences under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 325 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt), 427 (mischief), and 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and various sections under the Kerala Healthcare Service Persons and Healthcare Service Institutions Prevention of Violence and Damages to Property) Act, 2012. According to the prosecution, on March 4, six persons attacked the petitioner and his hospital after the wife of one of the accused persons gave birth to a stillborn child at the Fathima Hospital, Kozhikode, where the petitioner's wife was the Gynaecologist. Due to this incident, the accused persons developed a grudge against the petitioner as well as his wife and destroyed the glass and flowerpots of the hospital, and attacked the petitioner causing a fracture to his nasal bone. Initially, when the accused persons approached the Additional Sessions Court, Kozhikode on March 20 for anticipatory bail, it was dismissed after observing that custodial interrogation ass necessary. However, the Principal Sessions Court, Kozhikode subsequently granted them regular bail. .This prompted the petitioner-doctor to approach the High Court challenging the said bail order granted to the accused persons.After going through various precedents, the High Court noted that the Principal Sessions Court had not stated any reasons in the order for granting bail. “A glance at the impugned order reveals that neither has the learned Sessions Judge mentioned the facts of the case, the date of surrender, or the provisions under which offenses have been alleged nor even any reasons for granting bail. The offense alleged is also not fully correct and even the factual aspects mentioned, like the defacto complainant leading the gynecology department are also wrong,” the Court observed.It further noted that the observation of the Additional Sessions Judge that custodial interrogation was essential was not taken into reckoning by the Principal Sessions Court.Therefore, the High Court set aside the bail granted to the accused persons by the Principal Sessions Court..The petitioners were represented by advocates S Rajeev, V Vinay, Sarath KP, MS Aneer, Prerith Philip Joseph, and Anilkumar CR.The respondents were represented by advocates Noushad KA, A Ranjoith Narayanan, T Shajith and A Simi..[Read Order]