Pre-arrest bail plea of KEM physician rejected in sexual harassment case

The extra classes decide, in an order handed on April 23, noticed that there was a risk that many extra victims had suffered by the hands of the physician however silently endured it. “For truthful alternative of investigation to the investigating officer, the applicant can’t be granted anticipatory bail,” noticed Choose Gauri Kawdikar.

Based on the police, the criticism was initially filed by a 32-year-old assistant professor who alleged that Deokar repeatedly made inappropriate feedback and bodily advances, particularly when she wore a saree. She additionally described situations the place he touched her inappropriately throughout official features and examinations. 5 different docs got here ahead with related allegations, stating that Deokar behaved inappropriately throughout a Holi perform, seminars and informal outings.

The docs initially complained to Deokar’s spouse and later approached the hospital authorities earlier than submitting a police criticism. Deokar was then suspended and barred from getting into the hospital premises.

Deokar’s advocate argued {that a} false FIR had been registered towards him, and there was an inordinate delay in registering the FIR as effectively. He submitted that the criticism was filed because of private grudges and inside politics. The advocate additionally alleged that Deokar was on a number of committees and used to query the complainant physician when she arrived late.

The prosecution argued that the physician and his spouse had pressured the victims to withdraw the criticism, including that they’d already produced screenshots of this. The advocate for the complainant submitted that the physician tried to contact the victims and prepare a gathering by their colleague.

The courtroom noticed that there have been missed calls and messages from the physician to his alleged victims. “Thus, it’s clear that the applicant is instantly or not directly attempting to affect or pressurise the victims. In different phrases, there’s a robust risk of hindering the investigation by the applicant,” mentioned further Choose Kawdikar. The courtroom added that this was not a match case to grant anticipatory bail “because of his interference within the investigation by attempting to contact the victims instantly or by his spouse or by his colleagues”.

Choose Kawdikar mentioned that because the physician held a excessive place, he may affect the victims. She additionally noticed that given the opportunity of many extra victims who have been but to return ahead, there wanted to be an area for them to return ahead freely with none stress or undue affect.