April 02, 2026 09:17 am (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
Bengal SIR progress: 47 lakh of 60 lakh adjudicated cases disposed of, Supreme Court informed | Amit Shah to join Suvendu Adhikari on Bhabanipur nomination day; BJP plans mega roadshow | Fuel prices rise: Premium petrol, diesel hiked amid oil price surge | Commercial LPG up Rs 195.50 as global oil prices rise; domestic rates unchanged | Layoff alert: Oracle cuts 30,000 jobs globally, 12,000 hit in India | ‘Unsubstantial allegations’: Calcutta HC dismisses plea on ECI’s officer transfers in Bengal | Tennis icon Leander Paes joins BJP ahead of Bengal polls | 8 killed, several injured in crowd crush at Bihar temple in Nalanda | Trump signals exit from Iran war even as Strait of Hormuz remains shut: Report | Mystery death in Pakistan: JeM chief Masood Azhar’s brother found dead
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.