Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognisance In Brutal Assault Case
In a major development, the Supreme Court takes suo motu cognisance of the brutal assault on a woman advocate who was allegedly stabbed multiple times by her husband. The Court also ordered an inquiry into allegations that three hospitals refused to provide emergency medical treatment.
A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice J. Joymalya Bagchi heard the matter on Monday. The Bench registered the case on the basis of a letter sent by Advocate Sneha Kalita, who highlighted the attack on her colleague practising at Karkardooma Courts.
Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognisance In Advocate Assault Case
During the hearing, the Court was informed that the woman advocate suffered multiple stab injuries to vital organs. She reportedly called the Police Control Room and her brother for help soon after the assault.
Moreover, counsel told the Court that three hospitals allegedly refused to admit her because her condition was critical.
The Court noted the seriousness of the injuries and immediately initiated suo motu proceedings.
Husband Arrested, FIR Registered
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati informed the Bench that the police had already registered an FIR in the matter.
Further, she stated that the police arrested the accused husband during the intervening night of April 25 and 26 and later sent him to judicial custody.
She also informed the Court that doctors first treated the victim at AIIMS and Doctors later shifted her to a private hospital. Doctors now report that her condition is stable.
Inquiry Ordered Into Hospital Treatment Denial
The Bench expressed serious concern over allegations that three hospitals denied emergency treatment to the injured advocate.
Therefore, the Court directed the investigating officer to examine the circumstances surrounding the refusal of admission and submit a detailed status report.
This direction could have wider implications for emergency medical response protocols and hospital liability in India.
Supreme Court Takes Note Of Children’s Safety
The Court also took note of the victim’s three daughters, aged 12 years, 4 years, and 1 year.
According to the submissions, the in-laws allegedly took away two minor children after the assault. Their whereabouts remain unknown.
Meanwhile, the eldest daughter was reportedly left outside the house at night by the accused husband. Police later recovered her and placed her in the custody of her maternal grandparents.
The Bench directed the Delhi Police Commissioner to transfer the investigation to a senior officer. Preferably, the officer should be a woman of ACP or DCP rank.
In addition, the Court ordered the police to trace the two missing children immediately.
Interim Financial Relief Ordered
Observing the urgent need for medical and financial support, the Court directed National Legal Services Authority to release interim financial assistance to the victim by the following day.
At the end of the hearing, CJI Surya Kant expressed hope for the advocate’s speedy recovery.
Read More:Supreme Court Praises West Bengal Voter Turnout, Peaceful Polling
FAQs
Suo motu cognisance means the Supreme Court takes up a matter on its own without waiting for a formal petition. In this case, the Court acted immediately after receiving information about the brutal assault on the woman advocate.
No, hospitals are generally not permitted to refuse emergency treatment in life-threatening situations. In this case, the Supreme Court specifically ordered an inquiry into allegations that multiple hospitals denied admission to the victim before she was finally admitted to AIIMS.
The Supreme Court directed interim financial assistance of ₹3 lakh for the victim’s treatment and immediate care needs, including support for her children.
