Supreme Court slams West Bengal police over handling of RG Kar hospital case, asks CISF to provide security

Supreme Court slams West Bengal police over handling of RG Kar hospital case, asks CISF to provide security

In a critical hearing of the Suo Motu case regarding the rape and murder of a doctor at RG Kar Hospital in Kolkata, the Supreme Court on Tuesday, August 20, scrutinized the West Bengal Government and the police for their management of the case. The court’s interrogation highlighted significant lapses and raised questions about the integrity of the investigation.

Advertisement
Supreme Court slams West Bengal police over handling of RG Kar hospital case, asks CISF to provide security

In a critical hearing of the Suo Motu case regarding the rape and murder of a doctor at RG Kar Hospital in Kolkata, the Supreme Court on Tuesday, August 20, scrutinized the West Bengal Government and the police for their management of the case. The court’s interrogation highlighted significant lapses and raised questions about the integrity of the investigation.

Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud expressed grave concerns over the widespread dissemination of the victim's identity, along with photographs and video clips of the deceased, across various media platforms. He remarked on the alarming nature of this development, stating, "This is extremely concerning."

 

Also read: Assam: Endangered primate Slow Lorris rescued by villagers in Chirang, handed over to forest department
 

Representing the state of West Bengal, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal informed the court that the disturbing images were circulated prior to the arrival of law enforcement at the scene. Despite this assertion, the court remained troubled by the broader conduct surrounding the case.

The Supreme Court also grilled the state government on several key issues, including the actions of the hospital's Principal, delays in filing the First Information Report (FIR), and the violent protest that erupted at the hospital on August 14. The bench pointedly questioned why the Principal, who resigned from RG Kar Hospital, was subsequently given charge of another institution, suggesting possible administrative irregularities.

Further intensifying the scrutiny, the bench inquired about the timing of the FIR's registration. Advocate Sibal responded that an "Unnatural Death" case had been promptly registered, asserting that there was no undue delay in the filing of the FIR. Despite this claim, the court's line of questioning indicated its dissatisfaction with the state's handling of the situation, signaling that the investigation may require deeper examination and accountability.

Edited By: Nandita Borah
Published On: Aug 20, 2024
POST A COMMENT