In doing so, the court asked the state government to reconsider the remohile special public prosecutor (SPP) Pradip gharat from the trial related to suicide of Dr Payal Tadvi in 2019, allegly duzent. Her Seniors.

A division bench of justice ravindra v ghuge and ghutam ankhad was hearing a plea by Payel’s mother abeda tadvi, who challenged the march 7, 2025, notifications is found by state law and judiciary department. Gharat as spp and appointed mahesh mule as special public prosecutor.

Payal’s Three Seniors at Tn Topiwala National Medical College and Byl Nair Hospital Are Named As Accused in the Case. Gharat as spp failed an application before the sessions court to add the head of department (HOD) Court Allowed on February 28.

On Wednesday, Chief Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar, Representing the State Government, Submitted that it was empowered to take such Decision under the criminal procedure code (CRPC). Gharat’s Removal was Due to “Miscommunication and some loss of faith between the client and the lawyer” and the decision was taken “Without any prejudice,” he added.

“Have you (State) Every Thought of Prejudice To The Lawyer With 40 Years Experience? Your affidavit (Giving Justification for Removal) is so distasteful and disresteful for him…. Has power of removal, it should be exercised judicly…. Peon or Clerk, ”Justice ghuge orally remarked.

After venegaonkar sought to file a short reply stating that state did not have any double about gharat’s credit, justice ghuge responsive, “Let him continue (as spp). is reposed in him… .This (reply) would be lip service… “

Venegaonkar claimed that gharat had exercised his powers as spp under crpc to file application to add accused, to which judges say that too much must have been bassed on the government.

On Court’s Query, Additional Public Prosecutor SV Gavand Said that as per gharat, he would continue as spp if permission was granted by the course and Can it address HC ifcred.

“Look at his magnanimity and element of devotion. Despite the insulting affidavit, he saids alright, if I am given this task, I will still do it… The Lawyer should be appreciated and shield not to be visible…. Prosecutors have been removed uncerniable. Spp decided to add the accused out of his own wisdom and his client does not know? ” The bench questioned.

The Court Further Said the “Most Important Angle” and a Question Before It was “How Far Prosecutors Work Under a Hanging Sword of Unclerenty” and “Who Will Venture to Act India” And “Show Sourage” in Future. Instead become “supine”.

The HC also remarked there was a “close proximity” between the data of order passed to add accused and removal of spp.

“It appears Some Did Not Like The Hod Being Added As Accused. You (State) May deny it, but this is the information,” It said and granted time to reconsider the decision tilling on the next hearing on august 26.