The Supreme Court of India has taken suo motu cognisance of the brutal assault on a woman advocate, who was allegedly stabbed multiple times by her husband in Delhi. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice J. Joymalya Bagchi initiated the proceedings after a letter was sent by Advocate Sneha Kalita, highlighting the gravity of the attack on her colleague, who practices at the Karkadooma Courts.

The victim reportedly sustained severe injuries to vital organs and is currently undergoing treatment at AIIMS. The case has also raised serious concerns regarding the response of medical institutions and the safety of the victim's children.

Key Judicial Directives & Observations:

Inquiry into Medical Negligence: The Court has ordered an inquiry into allegations that three hospitals refused to provide emergency medical treatment to the advocate following the assault. The bench emphasized that the "golden hour" for treatment is critical and that hospitals are legally bound to provide emergency care.
Investigation Transfer: The Delhi Police Commissioner has been directed to transfer the investigation to a senior officer, preferably a woman officer of the rank of Assistant Commissioner (ACP) or Deputy Commissioner (DCP), to ensure a sensitive and thorough probe.
Emergency Financial Aid: Recognizing the victim's urgent need for support, the Court directed the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) to release interim financial assistance by the following day to cover medical expenses and the care of her children.
Safety of Children: The Court expressed concern over the whereabouts of the victim’s two minor children, who were allegedly taken by their in-laws after the attack. The eldest child, who was reportedly abandoned by the accused husband on the night of the incident, has been recovered and is in the custody of maternal grandparents.
Status of the Accused: Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati informed the bench that an FIR has been registered, and the husband was arrested during the night of April 25–26 and subsequently remanded to custody.

The case, titled "In Re: Brutal Assault On A Member Of Legal Fraternity & Need For Judicial Intervention," highlights the judiciary's proactive stance on protecting members of the legal community and addressing systemic failures in emergency medical responses.