A political crisis has erupted in Maharashtra after a video was circulated that the Shiv Sena corporator Ramesh Mhatre attacked a woman doctor during a verbal dispute between the group and others.
But Mhatre has denied it all, and maintains that the footage in question is fake and the slap was an illusion made up by the “camera angle.”
The incident is resonating among medical professionals, opposition parties and people in society. Calls for a serious punishment against the corporator are up and the Shiv Sena leader has claimed he never physically assaulted the doctor, and says the media have drawn conclusions without knowing the full context of the incident.
The fighting took place during a heated exchange at a medical facility where a dispute was reported over patient-related issues and hospital management, the hospital staff said. The corporator and hospital staff had a verbal fight, witnesses said.
A video of the incident soon appeared online and appeared to show Mhatre making physical contact with the woman doctor. The footage went viral and soon social media users claimed that the corporator had slapped the doctor in the midst of the argument.
Responding to the controversy, Ramesh Mhatre categorically denied assaulting the doctor. He had alleged on the cover of this paper that the viral video did not accurately portray the incident and that the slap was the result of the recording angle.
"The video is misleading because of the camera angle. I did not hit the doctor. People are making assumptions after watching only a few seconds of footage," Mhatre said while defending his actions.
He added that a complete recording of the incident would give a completely different picture and said that he had just gestured during the argument rather than striking anyone.
A reasonable explanation, but it’s not enough to convince many. Medical groups and health professionals have rejected such behavior and have said it is wrong to make threats, and to make aggressive, threatening behavior towards doctors is not acceptable under any circumstances as long as it is not done in a professional context.
Doctors’ organizations have called for a fair investigation of the matter and called for appropriate legal action if evidence indicates physical assault occurred. Healthcare professionals often face very difficult work, and should therefore be protected, they said.
Opposition leaders also criticized the corporator's comments, saying they were a way to avoid responsibility by blaming the camera angle instead of addressing the allegations directly. They called for transparency in the investigation and urged authorities to examine all available video footage and witness statements before reaching a conclusion.
On the other hand, Mhatre’s supporters argued short video clips spread on social media don’t capture the whole sequence of events. They said conclusions should not be drawn from a viral recording without a thorough analysis of all evidence.
Video footage can be very important evidence but it has to be considered alongside eyewitness accounts, forensic analysis and other available material to determine whether an offence has actually occurred. Investigating agencies will usually look at different angles of the camera, original recordings and witness testimony to establish the facts.
The issue has once again raised concerns about public representatives and healthcare workers. In recent years politicians, patients’ relatives and medical professionals have been at odds in more than one state and more laws to protect doctors from violence and intimidation have been under pressure.
Hospital officials have begun cooperating with investigators by providing CCTV images and other information. Police will look at all the evidence, including the viral video, to determine if any laws have been broken.
Even after the investigation is over, the incident continues to be a topic of political debate in Maharashtra. And while Ramesh Mhatre insists that the viral footage is wrong because of the camera angle, others say the truth is only discovered through a complete and unbiased investigation.
The results of the investigation will guide the investigation and if allegations are substantiated and if further legal or disciplinary action will follow.
