Payal Tadvi Suicide: Bombay HC pulls up Mumbai Police for gaps in investigation

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday pulled up the Mumbai Police for the delay in recording the statements of key witnesses before the Magistrate Court in the Dr. Payal Tadvi suicide case..Observing that the material in chargesheet contains several lacunae, the Court directed the Crime Branch of the Mumbai Police to record statements of six witnesses, including Dr. Payal’s roommate, Dr. Snehal Shinde, within three days..According to the suicide note, Dr. Snehal Shinde also faced harassment from accused doctors, Hema Ahuja, Ankita Khandelwal and Bhakti Mehere..The Court will decide on the bail application of the three doctors after statements are recorded..The three doctors from BYL Nair Medical college have been accused of abetting the suicide of Dr Payal Tadvi and of ragging and caste discrimination against Tadvi..A Single Bench of Justice Sadhana S Jadhav observed that the Crime Branch had also failed to record statements Dr Tadvi’s colleagues, who were made witnesses in the case and are in a vulnerable position at the hospital..The Court has directed the Magistrate Court to ensure the missing statements are recorded at the earliest. Appearing for the Crime Branch, Special Public Prosecutor Raja Thakare has assured the Court that necessary steps will be taken for recording these statements expeditiously. The statements so recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) are admissible as evidence during trial..The High Court has also queried whether the Crime Branch can frame charges against Dr. Yi Ching Ling, head of the Obstetrics and Gynaecology department at BYL Nair Hospital, for abetment of ragging under Section 7 of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1999. As per this provision, if the head of an educational institution fails or neglects to take action when a complaint of ragging is made, such person shall be deemed to have abetted the offence of ragging..SPP Thakare has submitted that the Investigation Officer (IO) in the case is of the prima facie opinion that the suspended Dr. Ling would be liable for disciplinary action as she did not consider complaints made by Dr. Tadvi’s mother, husband, and her colleagues, since there was no written complaint under Section 6 of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1999..Thakare further informed that a recommendation letter for the departmental enquiry of Dr. Ching Ling has been prepared by the Investigating Officer. However, he submitted that the same is yet to be submitted to the Municipal Commissioner..Appearing for the accused, Advocate Aabad Ponda argued that after spending 70 days in judicial custody, the accused deserved to be granted bail since they are not accused of homicide or murder and as they did not intend to end Dr. Tadvi’s life..However, Justice Jadhav noted that the comparison forwarded between the offences charged and crimes involving physical injury would not stand. The judge remarked,.“In this case, the mental injury inflicted by the accused was severe and it reflected much prior to the incident. If the deceased had maintained silence, the gravity of mental injury would not get exposed. The mental injury could have been curtailed.”.The Court also noted that the licenses of the accused doctors should be terminated at least pending the trial..Difficult to impose Media Gag.While hearing the matter, the Court also expressed difficulties in imposing restrictions on media reportage of the bail hearing. Referring to the Bombay High Court’s rejection of a plea to impose a media gag in the Sohrabuddin Shaikh case, Justice Jadhav observed,.“It seems difficult since another bench of this court has revoked the media gag, in an equally sensitive and national level case.”.The request to prohibit media coverage was made by Advocate Aabad Ponda and supported by SPP Thakare. However, Advocate Gunratan Sadavarte, on behalf of Dr Tadvi’s mother, opposed the request..After a Special Court rejected their bail applications in June, the three accused doctors had moved to Bombay High Court seeking bail. The special court had rejected their bail stating that there was a likelihood of the accused doctors trying to abscond or tamper with the evidence..The Bombay High Court, last month directed its registry to make arrangements to facilitate the video recording of the bail hearing of the doctors accused in the Dr. Payal Tadvi suicide case..Dr. Payal Tadvi, a postgraduate student at the TN Topiwala National Medical College, Mumbai had committed suicide by hanging herself in a hostel room on May 22. Her family had accused three of her seniors of harassment and caste discrimination prompting Dr. Tadvi to end her life. Dr. Tadvi belonged to a Scheduled Tribe..The chargesheet filed by Crime Branch includes suicide note recovered from Dr. Payal Tadvi’s mobile. Police claimed that Tadvi, in her note, blamed three accused doctors for harassment and said that they will be responsible for her death..The three doctors have been booked under Sections 34 and 306 of the Indian Penal code (IPC), Section 67 of Information Technology (IT) Act, Section 3 of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act..The Court will take up the bail applications for hearing next on August 9..[Read the Bombay HC order passed on August 6, 2019]