About the Author: Kirti Mahal is a Student of the Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies.
INTRODUCTION
On 9th August 2024, news spread like wildfire that one on-duty lady doctor was brutally murdered and raped at her place of work. This horrific act occurred in a workplace that is supposed to be a safe place, exposing systematic failures. The victim was the only child of her parents, and she completed her MBBS degree from the Kalyani Medical College in the year 2022. She was doing her PGT in Chest Medicine from the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital. She was in her 2nd year of PGT at the RG Kar Medical College & Hospital. The initial investigation led to the arrest of Sanjay Roy, who was a 33-year-old civic volunteer associated with the Kolkata Police. He was charged under the sections of murder and rape under the Indian Penal Code. This case raises concerns regarding workplace safety. Employer responsibility and the legal standards applied in cases of gender-based violence. The judiciary’s role in delivering justice while adhering to constitutional safeguards, statutory provisions, and judicial precedents forms the crux of this discussion.
DETAILS OF THE NIGHT
The trainee doctor had completed her long and exhausting 36-hour shift, and after finishing her duties, she had dinner with her colleagues and decided to take a rest in a seminar hall that was located in the hospital premises, a place that doctors often use for short breaks. The victim was seen last alive at around 2:50 on 9th August 2024 at the Seminar Hall by her colleague, who from the main door noticed that the victim was sleeping in the said room on a mattress on the dais. The next morning, when there was a search for the victim, her lifeless body was discovered, which shocked the entire nation and the entire medical community. The colleagues looked for a sign of life, but the victim was already gone. Her pupils were dilated and fixed, which implied that the victim was no more. Afterwards, an unnatural death case was started by the police, and the same was informed to the Parents of the Victim. The body of the victim was sent for a post-mortem, and the whole procedure was videographed. While conducting the investigation, the police officers scanned the CCTV footage of the various cameras that were installed in the hospital. They found one Civic Volunteer posted at the RG Kar Hospital identified as the victim. He took entry and exit at the Chest Department, which was visible in the footage and was admitted based on the said footage that when he entered the hospital, he had a helmet in his hand and one Bluetooth device earphone was hanging from his neck, but when he left, he only was carrying his helmet and the earphones were missing. During the legal proceedings, the accused never denied the truthfulness of the said footage, but when asked about the headphones’ whereabouts, he could not explain. The missing headphone becomes a piece of evidence that helps the prosecution to prove that the accused was there at the crime scene.
PUBLIC AND MEDICAL COMMUNITY RESPONSES
The incident led to nationwide protests by both the general public and the medical community demanding justice and immediate reforms. Medical Professionals launched a massive protest and staged demonstrations, boycotted classes, and even did a hunger strike that lasted for 17 days. They demanded better security in hospitals, the installation of more CCTV cameras, and strict entry restrictions for non-hospital staff. They demanded immediate action against any negligence by the administration, as there was another incident where the non-hospital staff was found sleeping in the hospital. The Indian Medical Association condemned this incident and gave a 48-hour ultimatum to authorities. They call for immediate safety reforms for female healthcare workers. People across the nation took to social media and the streets to express their anger. Facing pressure from the masses, the West Bengal government removed the hospital superintendent and ordered a review of security arrangements at all government medical colleges in the state.
The case also sparked discussions in the Parliament, and the opposition leaders criticized the state law enforcement. Leaders and the masses demanded the death penalty for the accused.[1]
MEDICAL EVIDENCE
The opinion of the autopsy team was that the death was due to the effects of manual strangulation associated with smothering. The manner of death was homicidal, and they also found medical pieces of evidence of the forceful penetration, which was suggestive of the possibility of sexual assault. They also found multiple abrasions were found over and it was found that the victim was pressed with hands and the victim tried to resist it due to friction and the presence of the metal brace injury. It was also held the victim was attacked from the front side as no injuries were found on the backside. They also found the time of death of the victim, which was between 4:45 and 5:15 AM. The quantum of partly digested food found it. The blood was coming out from the eyes of the victim due to asphyxia.
For the evidence of sexual assault, they found an injury on the victim’s right side of the hymen at 10 o’clock position and one full-thickness tear of the hymen at 3’0 clock position. Also, a blood-tinged moist secretion was coming out from the vagina, indicating insertion. The nature of the injury found on the body of the victim also proved that a single person did the insertion, and there’s no evidence of several multiple penetrations. The DNA profile of the saliva that was sent for forensic analysis was also matched with the accused’s DNA profile. Human blood was found in the clothes of the victim, which matched the DNA sample of the accused. Multiple hairs over the mattress were found and it again confirmed the accused presence.
JUDGMENT
The court believed that the prosecution was successful in establishing the claims, considering—
- The accused was seen in the CCTV footage. The court here upheld the admissibility of the electronic devices.[2]
- Findings of the post-mortem report that found the death of the victim was homicidal due to the effects of smothering and manual strangulation. The court emphasizes here the importance of forensic evidence in criminal trials.[3]
- Evidence of forceful penetration. Here, the court relied on forensic and medical evidence to establish sexual violence.[4]
- Forensic Matching of DNA. Here the court recognized DNA evidence as a tool in rape trials.[5]
- Baseless explanations were given by the accused. Here, these baseless explanations strengthen the prosecution’s claims.
- The mobile tower location of the accused and the headphones made the case strong.
The court also analyzed that there was no link between the accused and the victim. They didn’t know each other before, and there was no hostility between them. The offense committed by the accused wasn’t pre-planned, and the intention was made on the spot to fulfill his lust. The trial court gave a sentence of life imprisonment to the accused. The court draws a balance between aggravating and mitigating factors and decides whether the case falls within the category of the rarest of rare, Considering all the circumstances, the court found it wasn’t the case and there was a possibility of reformation, and they followed the judgment of Swami Shraddananda v State of Karnataka.[6] The judiciary believed that its primary responsibility was to uphold the rule of law and serve justice based on evidence and not on public sentiment. The court also noted that there was no prior criminal misconduct done by the accused, and the court believed that their duty wasn’t to match brutality and brutality but to reform, rehabilitate, and heal.[7]
CONCLUSION: SOCIO-LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
The case of the RG Kar doctor points to legal and social failures in safeguarding women in the workplace. While the accused was found guilty under Sections 302 and 376 of the IPC, the case points toward issues of workplace security[8], institutional negligence, and enforcement of law. The order of the court granting life imprisonment as opposed to the death penalty is per court principles established in cases such as Swami Shraddananda v. State of Karnataka. Aside from the conviction, the incident also indicates an absence of security in hospitals to support women’s right to dignity and safety under Article 21 of the Constitution.[9] The mass protests demonstrate the contribution of civil society in advocating legal and policy reforms. Real justice is not merely punishing criminals but making sure such crimes are not repeated. Enforcing stronger workplace safety legislation, imposing stricter policies, and holding institutions responsible are key measures for preventing gender-based violence.
References:
[1] Pushkar Tiwari, ‘A Rape- Murder, Then Massive Protests: Timeline of Kolkata’s RG Kar college case’ NDTV News (18 January 2025) <https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/rg-kar-hospital-rape-murder-case-sanjay-roy-a-murder-then-massive-protests-timeline-of-kolkata-college-case-7501913> accessed 20 January 2025
[2] Shafhi Mohammad v State of Himachal Pradesh SLP (Crl) No 2302/2017
[3] Selvi v State of Karnataka (2010) 7 SCC 263
[4] Mukesh & Anr v State for NCT of Delhi (2017) 6 SCC 1
[5] Krishna Kumar Malik v State of Haryana (2011) 7 SCC 130
[6] Swami Shraddananda v State of Karnataka (2008)13 SCC 767
[7] ‘Kolkata’s Court Decision on RG Kar Rape case, (Drishti Judiciary, 21 January 2025) <https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/editorial/kolkata-s-court-decision-on-rg-kar-rape-case> accessed 12 March 2025
[8] Vishaka and Ors v State of Rajasthan (1997) 6 SCC 241
[9] Constitution of India 1950, art 21