April 18, 2026 09:19 pm (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
Pushback from smartphone makers: Centre drops Aadhaar app pre-install plan — report | Meta eyes first wave of layoffs on May 20: Report | TCS breaks silence on Nida Khan: ‘No HR role, no power’ in Nashik case | ‘Panic reaction’: Rahul Gandhi on women’s bill, says PM Modi ‘wants to send a message’ | Adani Group shares rise as Gautam Adani becomes Asia’s richest, overtakes Mukesh Ambani | TCS Nashik ‘conversion’ case accused seeks anticipatory bail citing pregnancy | IT raids TMC candidate Debasish Kumar’s premises ahead of Bengal polls | Bengal SIR: Supreme Court allows voters restored by tribunal till April 21 and 27 to vote | 'Women won't spare you': PM Modi warns Opposition over resistance to quota bill | Vijay booked in 3 cases over poll code violation ahead of Tamil Nadu polls
Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Bombay High Court seeks reply from Maharashtra govt on plea challenging shifting of over 1200 high risk contacts of COVID-19 patients

| @indiablooms | May 04, 2020, at 08:05 pm

Mumbai/IBNS: Mumbai High Court Nagpur bench has sought a reply from the Maharashtra government and Nagpur Municipal Corporation (NMC) on a Public Interest Litigation(PIL) filed by one Mohammad Nishat, challenging the civic body's decision to shift more than 1200 people from COVID-19 hotspots in Nagpur to institutional quarantine centres, media reports said.

A single judge bench of Justice Anil S Kilor heard the urgent plea through video conferencing which alleged that the NMC had unlawfully detained nearly 1408 persons from Satranjipura and Mominpura areas, claiming that they were high-risk contacts of the COVID-19 patients in the area, said an Indian Express report.

On April 5, a 68-year-old man died of coronavirus in the area, who was later found to have come in contact with his sons-in-laws’ friend, who had links with the Tablighi Jamaat event, the report added. After the first death, several cases of coronavirus were reported from this area.

The PIL alleged that the NMC did not follow the COVID-19 guidelines issued by the Central Government and Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and was randomly picking up people and putting them in institutional quarantine.

Advocate Tushar Mandlekar on behalf of the litigant argued only COVID-19 patients and their high risk and low-risk contacts could be placed in quarantine and isolating anyone else amounts to infringement of their fundamental rights of freedom of expression and right to life with dignity, said the report.

Citing some news reports, he said several people from Satranjipura and Mominpura were quarantined in MLA Hostel and Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology (VNIT) located in crowded areas.

Responding to the petition Advocate Sudhir M Puranik for NMC submitted that the civic body was following all the Central guidelines and only ‘high risk contacts’ of the COVID-19 patients of the localities were quarantined, the report added.

Dr. Pravin Gantawar of NMC Health department assured that the people isolated belonged to high risk category and all precautions were adopted to quarantine them following the central guidelines, it said.

Advocate Mandlekar said the petitioner did not doubt the civic body's intention to work in favour of the safety of the people, but was concerned about the places these people were quarantined.

Assistant Solicitor General Ulhas Aurangabadkar and State government lawyer S Y Deopujari sought from the Court two day's time to file their response to the petition.

Issuing notices to authorities seeking replies to the plea, the bench scheduled the next hearing on Tuesday, May 5, the report informed.

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.