Dr Payal Tadvi's Mother Moves Bombay HC Challenging State's Decision To Remove Pradip Gharat As SPP, Says He Was Prosecuting Effectively

Abeda Tadvi, informant and mother of Dr Payal Tadvi, has filed a petition challenging the removal of SPP Gharat from the case through a March 7 Government Notification. She submits that Gharat was removed as SPP from the case without any reason and despite him effectively representing the prosecution's case.

A division bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Dr Neela Kedar Gokhale on Wednesday asked the State to take instructions and respond. The High Court will hear Tadvi's petition on April 2.

The trial against three doctors, Dr. Ankita Kailash Khandelwal, Dr. Hema Suresh Ahuja and Dr. Bhakti Arvind Mehare is going on before a Sessions Court. They are accused of abetting the suicide of Dr.Payal Tadavi by humiliating her and passing disparaging remarks about her caste. In August 2019, the High Court had granted conditional bail to the accused and in October 2020, the Supreme Court had permitted the accused to re-enter the college and the hospital to pursue their courses of study.

The petition states that a SPP was initially appointed through a Government Notification dated 1 June 2019. However, on 20 February 2020, the petitioner wrote to the Chief Minister requesting the change of SPP due to apprehensions about the manner in which the case was being conducted. Pradip Gharat was subsequently appointed as the SPP in the case through a notification dated 6 July 2020.

It is stated that on 13 November 2024, Gharat submitted an application under Section 319 CrPC to implead one Dr. Yi Ching Ling Chung Chiang as an accused, based on the anti-ragging committee's report and compliant made against her by Payal's family. On 28 February 2025, the Sessions Court allowed the said application.

The petition states that one week after passing of the said order, the State Law and Judiciary Department issued the impugned notification on the recommendation of the Home Department to remove Gharat as the SPP. It is stated that Mahesh Manohar Mule has been appointed as the new SPP to the case.

It is submitted that the impugned notification has been issued without assigning any reasons and despite Gharat consistently appearing and representing the prosecutions' case.

It is stated that his removal after application to array Dr. Ching Ling as accused raises questions whether he is being punished for conducting the case well as a prosecution. It is stated that Gharat has played a pivotal role since his appointment and presenting the prosecution's case effectively.

It is stated that the petitioner was neither informed nor consulted about the decision to remove Gharat as SPP. The petition refers to Rule 4(5) of SC ST Rules, which provides that a District Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate may engage an eminent Senior Advocate for conducting cases in the Special Court, if the victim necessary or victim desires. It is stated that this provision indicates the intent of the law to taken into account victim's request while deciding the legal representation.

The petitioner thus prays for quashing of the impugned notification.

Case title: Abeda Tadvi vs State of Maharashtra & Ors

Counsel for Petitioner: Advocate Lara Jesani

WP/1476/2025 (Criminal)