Mainstream Weekly

Home > 2025 > Rethinking the R G Kar Verdict | Arup Kumar Sen

Mainstream, Vol 63 No 4, January 25, 2025

Rethinking the R G Kar Verdict | Arup Kumar Sen

Sunday 26 January 2025, by Arup Kumar Sen

#socialtags

Late Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer was a champion of human rights. He “started a trend for judges to leave the courtroom and go out there to see with their own eyes the situation on the ground.” The recent judgement delivered by a sessions court in Kolkata in the brutal rape and murder case of a junior doctor on duty at the R G Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9, 2024, signifies a reversal of the trajectory of delivering justice preached by Krishna Iyer. The additional district and sessions judge, Sealdah, castigated the roles of the police and hospital authorities in their handling of the rape and murder of the junior doctor. In the 172-page judgement, the additional sessions judge criticized the hospital authorities and said that their actions in the wake of the incident “seemed to cast a doubt that they wanted to suppress something.” Similarly, it was observed by the Court that the police treated the case in an “indifferent manner” from the very beginning. (See The Indian Express, January 22, 2025) However, the Court did not implicate the police officials and the hospital authorities in its judgement, and sentenced Sanjay Roy, a civic police volunteer, to life imprisonment for the rape and murder.

The parents of the deceased doctor are unhappy with the judgement. While speaking to media persons, they stated that if the CBI had properly investigated the case, then several others would have been arrested and convicted. (See The Hindu, January 20, 2025)

It may be stated in this connection that the junior doctors’ movement in Kolkata in the wake of the brutal rape and murder of the young doctor on duty put pressure on the state government for the removal of the health secretary of the state and Kolkata Police Commissioner. In response to the verdict of the sessions court, the representatives of West Bengal Junior Doctors Front organized a rally demanding that the others who were held responsible for the crime be punished too. (The Hindu, January 18, 2025)

The order of the Court signifies the ethical foundations of delivering justice in this case: “The judiciary’s primary responsibility is to uphold the rule of law and ensure justice based on evidence, not public sentiment. It is of prime importance that the court maintain its objectivity and impartiality by focusing solely on the facts and evidence presented during the trial, rather than being swayed by public opinion or emotional reactions to the case” (Quoted in The Hindu).

The ethical question that comes to our mind in this context is: Would justice be denied if there is deliberate destruction of evidence by the persons who committed the crime!

ISSN (Mainstream Online) : 2582-7316 | Privacy Policy|
Notice: Mainstream Weekly appears online only.