Dr Saif is main accused in Dr. Dharawath Preethi suicide case who died on 26 February after allegedly trying to end her life.
Dr Saif. (Supplied)
Dr MA Saif Ali, who was booked on charges of ragging and harassment of Dr Dharawath Preethi — the first-year postgraduate student of the Kakatiya Medical College who died on 26 February after allegedly trying to end her life earlier — has filed a writ petition before the Telangana High Court seeking revocation of his suspension from the Kakatiya Medical College.
Saif claimed that the suspension was imposed without granting him an opportunity to be heard. This, he said, was in violation of the National Medical Commission (Prevention and Prohibition of Ragging in Medical Colleges and Institutions) Regulations of 2021.
Preethi allegedly attempted suicide on 22 February, after being apparently harassed by Saif at the Kakatiya Medical College (KMC) in the Warangal district of Telangana.
On 22 February, Saif was booked at the Matwada Police Station under various sections including 306 and 354 of the IPC, Section 4(v) of the TS Prohibition of Ragging Act, and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(w)(ii), and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act of 2015, over his purported role in the alleged suicide of Preethi. He was arrested on 23 February.
Preethi passed away on 26 February at NIMS Hospital in Hyderabad.
After spending approximately two months in jail, Saif was granted bail on 20 April. The Warangal police subsequently filed a 970-page chargesheet on 7 June in the SC/ST court, naming Saif as the primary accused.
Preethi, belonging to the Banjara-Lambada community in the ST category, was subjected to harassment and ragging by her senior, Saif, they said.
Consequently, he was charged with abetment to suicide, ragging, and offences under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
An investigation was conducted by ACP Bonala Kishan from Warangal, who recorded the statements of 70 witnesses.
Additionally, cellphone call data was collected, and reports from scientific, technical, medical, and forensic experts were obtained to aid the investigation.
It is important to note that the autopsy report, which could shed light on the cause of Preethi’s death, has not been made public yet.
Saif said the Kakatiya Medical College suspended him on 9 June without allowing him an opportunity to present his side, which goes against Regulation No 23 of the National Medical Commission (Prevention and Prohibition of Ragging in Medical Colleges and Institutions) Regulations of 2021.
The college also ignored Saif’s representations dated 28 April, 23 May, and 2 June, considering them illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and against the principles of natural justice, he said.
Saif petitioned that he had been falsely implicated in the case involving the alleged suicide of Preeti.
He claimed that the ragging committee’s findings were biased as he was not given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings or defend himself.
Saif also asserted that the committee’s conclusions were one-sided, vague, false, and in violation of the governing regulations.
“The alleged findings of the ragging committee in its enquiry report are against the principles of natural justice, preserve, contrary to the facts and evidence and unsustainable in the eye of law solely on the grounds of being violative of the principles of natural justice as the petitioner was neither made a party to such proceedings nor given a chance to be heard,” read Saif’s petition.
It added that the entire probe was conducted on one single day and the punishment was imposed on the next day, which was self-conclusive of the fact that “the enquiry is highly biased, prejudiced and under the influence motivated media trials and external factors”.
Saif also highlighted that the governing regulations in effect are the National Medical Commission (Prevention and Prohibition of Ragging in Medical Colleges and Institutions) Regulations of 2021 — and not the outdated Medical Council of India (Prevention and Prohibition of Ragging in Medical Colleges/Institutions) Regulations of 2009.
He claimed that the college and the ragging committee referred to the old regulations, demonstrating negligence in their handling of the matter and a failure to uphold his right to a fair inquiry.
He argues that being punished without due process and based solely on accusations was unjust and contrary to the law.
Saif expressed his faith in proving his innocence in a court of law, but feared that the suspension would jeopardise his career opportunities and infringe upon his basic right to life.
The petition also said: “It is a settled proposition of law that no person is guilty unless proven otherwise and merely based on accusations, such a harsh punishment is unsustainable and contrary to the law more particularly for being violative of the Governing Regulations and violative of principles of natural justice.”
It added: “If he is punished in this manner by suspending from the college, the petitioner will lose his career opportunities and thereby a basic right to life is violated.”
On 21 June, Justice M Sudheer Kumar of the Telangana High Court presided over the petition and issued notices to KNRUHS and KMC, requesting them to submit their replies.
According to Advocate Srikanth Chintala, who represents Saif, the next hearing of the case is scheduled for 7 July, following the submission of responses by the college and the university.
“The court has asked them to not drag the case and take the steps accordingly,” Chintala told South First.
He added that every person needs a fair chance. “There is a clear procedural lapse on the part of the university in terms of dealing with the incident as well as with Dr. Saif’s suspension. It cannot be sustained in law. Moreover, keeping him under suspension will not serve any purpose except jeopardising his life and career,” said Chintala.
He added that the Supreme Court has said in a series of cases that every person is innocent until proven guilty. “In Saif’s case, unfortunately, things are made to look like he’s guilty unless proven innocent,” said Chintala.
In addition, Srikanth mentioned the case of Dr Payal Tadvi’s suicide, where the Supreme Court in 2020 granted permission to three postgraduate medical students accused in the case to complete the remaining nine months of their course at their college in Mumbai.
The bench of Justices UU Lalit, Vineet Saran, and Ajay Rastogi, while allowing the plea of the accused, stated that even convicts were permitted to pursue academic endeavours and develop their potential as individuals while serving their sentences.
The court emphasised that the state should support such pursuits rather than hinder them. The three students had been arrested on 29 May, 2019, following complaints of caste-based harassment by Payal Tadvi’s mother.
May 18, 2024
May 18, 2024
May 18, 2024
May 18, 2024
May 18, 2024
May 18, 2024
