The Gujarat High Court has refused bail to a doctor accused of helping to cover up the alleged rape of a teenage girl by illegally terminating her pregnancy and disposing of the foetus in a river to prevent DNA testing.
Justice Hasmukh D Suthar observed in the August 4 order that “judicial wisdom prevailed over money and muscle power” in bringing the case to light and held that the doctor aided in covering up the crime by allegedly performing an abortion beyond the legally permitted stage of pregnancy without the girl’s consent, failing to inform the police, and destroying medical records.
Stressing that personal liberty cannot override the collective interest of society, the court also noted that the girl’s parents, who should have protected or rescued her, allegedly accepted Rs 5 lakh from the landlord instead of protecting their daughter.
“In the present case, the applicant has abetted the offence which is going to accentuate to such an extent or elevated to such a high pedestal which would bring in anarchy or disorder in the society including interference with the administration of justice, as the accused (doctor and landlord) is having money and muscle power he can do whatever he wants,” the court’s order stated.
Missing report, court petition
The prosecution alleged that the girl was repeatedly sexually assaulted by her 52-year-old landlord between December 2024 and May 2025, resulting in a pregnancy. During this period, her parents allegedly accepted Rs 5 lakh from the landlord to suppress the matter.
Justice Hasmukh D Suthar noted that the accused doctor was earlier named in two cases of medical negligence.
It was noted that the father had twin daughters, including the survivor. The matter came to light only after he filed a missing person complaint and later approached the high court through a habeas corpus petition which sought her production before court. When the girl was traced, she was sent to a government children’s home after she refused to return to her parents.
The prosecution added that the doctor carried out the abortion without the girl’s consent when she was 21 weeks and five days pregnant. They also did not inform the police, though it was a medico-legal case. It was further alleged that the stillborn foetus was thrown into a river and the hospital records were destroyed to prevent investigators from collecting DNA evidence.
Parents forced abortion: Doctor
The doctor’s counsel submitted that he was falsely framed in the matter and that there was no allegation that the girl was sexually exploited by the doctor. She was allegedly exploited by her landlord, which resulted in a pregnancy of five to six months.
He submitted that the girl’s parents took her to a hospital and forced her to undergo an abortion. He denied allegations of administering drugs to the girl without her consent to cause a miscarriage or that the foetus was secretly disposed of. The lawyer said that whatever involvement is on the part of her parents and co-accused, the doctor has only rendered professional service.
The state’s counsel, Assistant Public Prosecutor Himanshu K Patel, said the petitioner indulged in the illegal activity despite being a doctor, and pointed out that two past incidents of alleged medical negligence were also registered against him.
It was argued that the doctor had helped the co-accused and failed to report the incident to the police, while claiming that the girl was aged between 16 and 18 years.
‘Wrong signal to society’
The high court noted that the 52-year-old accused is a landlord in a position of trust and authority towards the girl and he repeatedly raped the girl when she was incapable of giving free consent, and was otherwise reluctant.
“Despite repeated instances of rape, the parents acting as guardians failed to protect or rescue the victim. Instead, they entered into a settlement and received Rs 5 lakh from the accused, and a receipt for this transaction was recovered during the investigation,” the court added.
The high court also criticised the doctor’s lawyers, saying they twice attempted to mislead the court. It reminded lawyers that, as officers of the court, they must always place the correct legal position before the judge, whether it supports their client or not.
Noting that the doctor was named in two other cases related to medical negligence, the high court held that he seemed to be “habitually committing such crimes” and releasing him on bail in the present case would send the “wrong signal and message to society and undermine public confidence in the judicial system.”
Rejecting the doctor’s bail, the court said, “Liberty must not be given when it threatens the collective interest of the society and no one has the right to put on peril the liberty of others”. The high court dismissed the bail application, pointing out that filing of the chargesheet was not enough reason to release the accused on bail.
