2 min readMumbaiMar 18, 2026 03:27 PM IST
A sessions court has refused to discharge Mumbai Mayor Ritu Tawde in a 2016 case of alleged assault on school teachers, paving the way for trial against her to commence just a month after she was elected mayor.
Tawde faces several charges, including the use of criminal force to deter public servants from doing their duty.
“The two teachers/victims have categorically named the above applicant to be the person who beat them by hands inside the school. Even other witnesses took the name of the applicant being assaulter on the date of incident. This is more than sufficient to frame charge against the applicant,” Additional Sessions Judge Y P Manathkar said in an order on March 12.
The case dates back to an alleged incident on July 29, 2016. There was a dispute between some teachers of a public school and the school management over the transfer of a teacher, suffering from cancer. The teacher, one Shahin Khan, was unhappy at being transferred from a school in Shastri Nagar to the BKC school where the alleged incident took place. During the scuffle, two male teachers were allegedly assaulted by Tawde and others.
In her discharge plea, Tawde told the court that her presence at the spot was coincidental and unrelated to the incident and claimed that her status as a BJP corporator was being misused to “gain undue publicity”.
The prosecution opposed her plea, stating that there were seven witnesses to the assault, and two of the teachers who faced the alleged assault had identified Tawde, confirming her role in the incident. The prosecutor told the court that a school is a place of learning and an incident of assault between two groups of teachers should be viewed seriously.
The court said that it was considering the statements of the witnesses and other material in the case. It also relied on previous judgments, noting that it is not expected to conduct a ‘mini trial’ at the time of deciding a discharge plea or weigh evidence as if it were for a final conviction. It noted that if the materials disclose “grave suspicion” against the accused, the court is justified in framing a charge.
