RG Kar verdict: Why court condemned Police, Hospital but did not impose death penalty

The Kolkata trial court which convicted civic volunteer Sanjay Roy in the RG Kar rape and murder case did not mince its words in criticising the Kolkata police and the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital for their their conduct after the crime..Additional Sessions Judge Anirban Das found that the police had treated the case in a shockingly indifferent manner.Among other issues, Sub-Inspector of Police (SI) Subrata Chatterjee’s witness testimony indicated that an August 9, 2024 General Diary (GD) entry made by him was ante-dated. The said GD entry about the doctor’s death, supposedly made by the SI, had a time stamp of 10.10 AM whereas the police officer was not even at the police station at the time, the court found.“This evidence of one SI of police is an eye opener that police stations are treating the cases in a very indifferent manner. It also shocking that the concerned SI did not hesitate to say such illegal acts standing in the witness box. I did not expect such type of evidence from an officer in the rank of SI of Police. It shows how they have entertained the issue even when, the case became a sensitive one … It was his evidence that he was instructed to do so but he did not mention the names of anyone by whom he was instructed to do such an illegal act,” the Court observed in its judgment.It also found that in the Unnatural Death (UD) register maintained by the police station, a case number was kept blank and only filled up much later, in violation of the rules.The judge remarked that it was difficult to believe that the senior police official was unaware about the implication of such acts, even as he “proudly established his illegal acts” while giving his testimony during the trial“Being the court of law, I condemn such acts of SI Subrata Chatterjee,” he added..The Court went on to fault Assistant Sub-Inspector Anup Dutta for "pampering" the accused, and Inspector Rupali Mukherjee for inexplicably leaving the mobile phone of the accused unattended (and vulnerable to being tampered with)."Her (Inspector Mukherjee's) action of taking the mobile from the accused on 09.08.2024 and keeping it at Tala PS unattended is very curious one," the Court observed although it also acknowledged that there was no evidence to indicate that the phone was tampered with. .The judge went on to note that in the midst of all these lapses by the police, the victim’s father was made to run from pillar to post to get relief and lodge a complaint. He observed that there was no clear explanation as to why the victim’s parents were not advised to file the complaint earlier, or why the policy kept them waiting for hours before a complaint was finally lodged.Hence, the Commissioner of Police at Kolkata must act strictly against such illegal and indifferent acts by police officers of the Tala Police Station, the judge underscored.“It is not understandable to me why the police personnel of Tala PS kept everything behind a curtain and why such type of illegal acts was done by the concerned officer of Tala PS … As the Commissioner of Police, Kolkata is the highest administrative authority of Kolkata Police, I think that this type of illegal/indifferent acts of the police personnel should be tackled by him in a very strict way so that no one can be escaped and I also think that proper training be given to the officers regarding investigation specially in the cases where it rests upon circumstantial/electronic and scientific evidence,” the trial court said.It added that if the Tala police officers had taken proper initiative and dealt with the case appropriately from the beginning, the case would not have become as complicated as it eventually did..I am sorry to comment that that the officers of Tala PS showed a very indifferent attitude from the very inception.ASJ Anirban Das.The Court also condemned the RG Kar Hospital for trying to project the victim’s death as a suicidal one, so that the hospital authorities did not have to face any consequences.The judge observed that this “illegal dream” by the hospital was not fulfilled because junior doctors raised protests. However, he noted that the hospital’s acts caused significant delays in the probe and was probably the reason why the victim’s parents were not allowed to see their daughter for a long time after her death.“Being the court of law, I condemn such attitude of the RG Kar hospital authority,” the judge said..He further questioned why the hospital did not promptly inform the police about the victim’s death.“From the evidence as well as the documents proved in this case, it appears that no such intimation was sent to the police authority. The said act of the administrative head of the concerned hospital creates a shadow of doubt about the fact and it seems that they wanted to suppress anything and that there was dereliction of duty on their part,” the Court observed..It, however, clarified that these missteps by the police and the hospital were not enough to throw out the prosecution’s case, and that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to pinpoint Sanjay Roy as the man guilty of having raped and murdered the victim.“On the basis of my discussion after scanning of the evidences, I am of the view that the negligence of the IO or the police administration or the hospital authority as well as the perfunctory investigation can, in no way stand on the way of the prosecution case.”.Being the court of law, I condemn such attitude of the R.G Kar hospital authority.ASJ Anirban Das.Judiciary can't be swayed by emotional reactions, must rise above "eye for eye" mindset: Court.The Court added that although the crime was brutal and barbaric, this was not a case where the death penalty could be imposed as it did not fall in the category of “rarest of the rare” cases.The judge explained that courts cannot be swayed only by public sentiments when it comes to this aspect of sentencing. “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,” the judgment read.The Court noted that it also has to consider mitigating factors, including that there was no evidence of Roy having any prior criminal history.It added that in the realm of modern justice, one has to rise above primitive considerations such as “an eye for an eye” or a “tooth for a tooth” or a “life for a life.”“Our duty is not to match brutality with brutality, but to elevate humanity through wisdom, compassion and a deeper understanding of justice,” Judge Das observed..We must rise above the primitive instinct of "an eye for an eye" or “a tooth for a tooth” or “nail for a nail" or “a life for a life."ASJ Anirban Das.It eventually imposed life sentence on Sanjay Roy for the crime, on finding that this case did not meet the stringent requirements of "rarest of the rare" to impose the death penalty. "While acknowledging the immense grief and suffering of the victim's parents, for which no sentence can provide complete solace, the court's duty is to pass a sentence that is proportionate, just and in accordance with established legal principles ... The court must resist the temptation to bow to public pressure or emotional appeals and instead focus on delivering a verdict that upholds the integrity of the legal system and serves the broader interests of justice," the judgment said..[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.