JAIPUR: The (RSHRC) has asked the district collector of to furnish details of the case in which an executive magistrate court asked a doctor to submit a surety bond of Rs 1 crore (five bonds of Rs 20 lakh each) during the recent doctors‘ strike for bail for a minor offence.
The executive magistrate had also ordered judicial custody for the doctor if he failed to furnish the required bond.
The commission chairperson Justice said that it was taking up this matter without going into the merit of the doctors‘ agitation. The commission wants to test if the order was violative of the provisions of Section 12(d) of the Human Rights Protection Act 1993. This section has the provision to review safeguards provided by or under the Constitution or any law for the time being in force for the protection of human rights and recommend measures for their effective implementation.
In the case registered against Dr under sections 107 (abetment), 116(3) and 151 of the CrPC, additional district collector, Bharatpur city, has asked the doctor to furnish five surety bonds of Rs 20 lakh each apart from a surety of two government employees and a personal surety of Rs 50,000 for bail. He was arrested as a preventive measure after the doctors threatened to go on mass leave.
Though the sections under which the doctor was charged were very minor and the law does not put any limit on the amount of surety in such cases, the commission noted that there was no rational for asking such a huge amount as surety.
It noted that the intention of the officer was to put the doctor in jail.
The commission said that such a huge surety was not asked for even in serious criminal cases. The rights commission took up this matter as it militates against the constitutional provision of liberty and freedom.
Get latest news & live updates on the go on your pc with . Download The for your device.