Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.
Legal Services India

» Home
Tuesday, January 7, 2025

SC Most Strongly Castigates And Reprimands West Bengal State Government For Mishandling Horrific Case

Posted in: Criminal Law
Thu, Aug 22, 24, 11:28, 5 Months ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 10175
The investigation into the brutal rape, assault and murder of a lady doctor at RG Kar Medical College Hospital in Kolkata

Without displaying any inhibition of any kind and so also without pulling back any punches, we see that the Supreme Court as recently as on August 21, 2024 most strongly castigated, condemned and reprimanded the West Bengal government for its most atrocious mishandling of the investigation into the brutal rape, assault and murder of a lady doctor at RG Kar Medical College Hospital in Kolkata in the seminar hall on August 9 which caught the whole nation napping and exposed the most glaring chinks in the armour of even the new laws in which discretionary bombs vested in Judges in rape laws and penal laws pertaining to crimes against women have not been defused and we see that there is no mandatory death penalty nor even mandatory life term even for rape and murder of a woman nor for throwing acid on women which deserves zero tolerance!

Why we see that even in the Sections in new revised penal laws, most shockingly there is or after life term and so also or after death even in most heinous cases of raping and killing and why there is no mandatory death term or even mandatory life term for gang rapes and rapes against even minor girls? How can leniency of any kind be ever demonstrated against such most heinous crimes that pertains directly to the very survival of women in any civilized society?

It must be asked: Why should such demons in the form of men or boys be protected on ground of age or on any other ground allowing them to behave most cruelly with women and still not hang them on one pretext or the other? Nation must now certainly ponder on it without any more dilly-dallying on it and our Parliament also must deliberate, discuss and debate it threadbare but act most urgently! It brooks no more delay any longer!

It thus certainly merits no reiteration of any kind that these discretionary, dastardly and dangerous bombs in rape laws in hands of Judges even in the much publicized new revised penal laws definitely needs to be defused at the earliest so that those who indulge in such dastardly crimes are not able to escape the most strictest punishment on one pretext or the other. It must be said that it is high time now and definitely Judges should be now left with absolutely no discretion at all in such heinous crimes so that no one can ever dare to take the dignity and honour of women for granted thinking that he would escape with a light punishment on one pretext or the other by using money or muscle power or political power! Supreme Court must intervene now which it is doing and must also direct Centre to further amend even the revised penal laws if Centre does just nothing on it!

It is absolutely in the fitness of things that the Apex Court said that the conscience of the entire nation was shaken by the horrific and horrendous incident. While highlighting the alarming inadequacies in the State's response to the crime, the top court expressed its deepest concern over several instances of inaction by the State machinery. We see that healthcare services remain affected at state-run hospitals in West Bengal as junior doctors continued their strike even for the 13th consecutive day over the ghastly crime!

We see that a Bench of Apex Court led by CJI Hon'ble Dr Dhananjaya Yashwant Chandrachud and also comprising of Hon'ble Mr Justice JB Pardiwala and so also Hon'ble Mr Justice Manoj Mishra who took up the matter registered on its own motion (suo motu) questioned senior counsel Kapil Sibal who appeared for the Mamata Banerjee government noting that:
After the crime was detected in the early hours of the morning of August 9, the principal of the hospital tries to pass this off as a suicide. The parents are not allowed to see the body for a few hours… Until late at night no FIR was registered. Why this kind of inaction? What was the principal doing? Why no FIR until late in the evening? And why did the victim's father have to lodge this FIR? What were the authorities in the hospital doing? Doesn't autopsy reveal the victim was raped and murdered? Undoubtedly, there is an unexpected delay in the registration of the FIR. It is high time and police authorities must be held accountable for FIR not being lodged in time and those who refuse to lodge FIR must be dismissed from service and nothing less and in heinous cases of crime who refuse to lodge FIR should be jailed for five years at least! These reforms in the police functioning is the crying need of the hour!

It is worth noting that the Apex Court also wondered aloud stating that:
The hospital is invaded by a mob and critical facilities are damaged. What was the police doing when the hospital was vandalized? The crime scene was within the precincts of the hospital. What were the police personnel doing? They allowed the crime scene to be destroyed. The first thing the police ought to do is to secure the crime scene.

The billion dollar question that must be asked here is: Why should such police personnel not be given most strictest punishment so that a strong message goes to police that they cannot take their job for granted unlike Army where Centre has launched Agniveer Yojana by which many soldiers have to leave Army after few years of service? It merits pondering: Why we see no such Yojana for police where it is needed most? In addition, it also merits introspection that:
Why those police personnel who are guilty of dereliction of duty just suspended for short time or transferred to some other place and that's all?

What's more, it also must be asked: Why they are not most strictly punished for not doing anything to check crime and not punished even for refusing to lodge FIR? Centre needs to definitely deeply introspect on it and why the landmark recommendations suggested by the Apex Court on police reforms made in 2006 in landmark Prakash Singh vs Union of India case still lying unimplemented after 18 years in most of the States? It merits no reiteration that Centre cannot any longer keep on taking all this for granted and do just absolutely nothing for ushering in reforms in police as it has done in defence services in the form of Agniveer Yojana which has been sharply castigated also from several quarters yet Centre implemented it boldly! Why we see no such boldness for ushering in reforms in police where it is so desperately needed since 1947!

It must be noted that in the Apex Court, the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta representing the Centre and the CBI which took over the probe following the August 13 order of the Calcutta High Court said that a gathering of 7,000 people could not assemble without the knowledge and the connivance of the police. In its order, the Bench expressed its utter dismay over the abject failure of the police in securing the crime scene.

The Bench recorded in its order that:
In the aftermath the brutal incident and the demonstrations which followed, the State Government was expected to ensure the deployment of the State machinery to prevent a breach of law and order. It was all the more necessary to do so since investigation of the crime, which took place in the precincts of the hospital, was under way. We are unable to comprehend how the State was not prepared to deal with the incident of vandalisation of the premises. Absolutely valid point.

It would be also worthwhile to mention here that the Apex Court directed the Bengal government to file a status report by August 22 which is the next day of hearing on the progress of the investigation into the horrific vandalism that took place most inexplicably in the aftermath of the incident. It also must be certainly underscored that each and every person involved in the horrific vandalism must be identified and prosecuted and punished for trying to destroy the evidence to protect the guilty from punishment under the law! The Bench told the senior counsel Kapil Sibal that:
The State must ensure that those involved in vandalism are acted against and prosecuted. The State Government role is also under sharp scrutiny as police did just nothing at all to control the mob and at whose orders and why huge police was not deployed to ensure that no one tries to destroy the evidence in a case which has garnered not just national but international headlines for wrong reasons!

It is most shocking that during the hearing, senior advocate Aparajita Singh who represented the doctors organization titled Protect the Warriors informed the Bench that after the August 14 vandalism incident, the mob returned to the medical college hospital and threatened women doctors warning that they would suffer the same fate as the rape victim if they reported the incident. Aparajita also disclosed that one doctor had emailed a complaint to the police and presented a copy of it to the Bench. It was also added that of the 700 resident doctors, only around 100 doctors remain, while others have left the campus in the wake of the threats.

While taking a serious note of the complaint, the Bench opined that:
This is a very serious issue, Mr Sibal. The West Bengal government cannot be unaware of the fact that when there are protests, opposing groups will always attempt to disrupt them. It also must be noted that while conveying concern that the mob specifically identified women female doctors by name and threatened them with the same fate as the deceased, the Bench questioned wondering that why the police fled the scene after the mob descended. Should such police be still allowed to continue in service?

In the fitness of things, the Bench very rightly questioned that:
Look at it from a different angle. We are making a fervent appeal to the doctors to resume work to help marginalized and needy people. But if they come back, can these police be trusted to protect them? Who is going to provide security to women doctors? While taking a serious note of this, the Bench very rightly said that the Court would order the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) to secure the hospital and hostel premises.

In its order, the Bench noted that:
It is essential to create safe conditions for the doctors to return to their duties so that they can continue their medical education and provide medical care. Accordingly we have been assured by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that CISF will be deployed in sufficient numbers to guard the RG Medical college facilities, including the hostels where the resident doctors are staying. Mr Sibal has no objection, as the goal is to ensure the safety of the premises. It also further directed that any doctor with safety concerns could send an email to the Registrar (Judicial) of the Supreme Court which is most heartening to note.

It is also most refreshing to note that during the proceedings, the Bench further commendably directed the State Government not to take coercive actions against individuals participating in peaceful protests or expressing their views in the media and on social media. The Bench told the senior counsel Kapil Sibal appearing for the West Bengal State Government that:
Let the power of the State of West Bengal not be unleashed upon peaceful protesters. We must approach this with great sensitivity. We expect the government of West Bengal to exercise necessary restraint in response to peaceful protests conducted by any segment of society concerning the issues related to the incidents in Kolkata. Very rightly so!

In sum, it is high time and the West Bengal State Government must definitely comply with what all the Apex Court has directed. It also must deeply introspect for being rapped in the knuckles by the top court! It must also take strictest action most promptly against the police personnel who are guilty of dereliction of duty and not give them a long rope to escape and make gala at the cost of the lives of the innocents and their safety!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut - 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Legal Services India

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
The general principle, is that a FIR cannot be depended upon a substantive piece of evidence.The article discusses the general priciple, along with exceptions to it.
Victim plays an important role in the criminal justice system but his/her welfare is not given due regard by the state instrumentality. Thus, the role of High Courts or the Supreme Court in our country in affirming and establishing their rights is dwelt in this article.
Can anybody really know what is going inside the heads of criminal lawyers? I mean, yes, we can pick bits of their intelligence during courtroom trials and through the legal documents that they draft.
Terrorism and organized crimes are interrelated in myriad forms. Infact in many illustration terrorism and organized crimes have converged and mutated.
Right to a copy of police report and other documents As per section 207 of CrPC, accused has the right to be furnished with the following in case the proceeding has been initiated on a police report:
In terms of Section 2 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), "human rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution
The Oxford dictionary defines police as an official organization whose job is to make people obey the law and to prevent and solve crime
the Supreme Court let off three gang rapists after they claimed a ‘compromise formula’ with the victim and agreed to pay her a fine of Rs 50,000 each for their offence.
benefit those prisoners who are kept in solitary confinement, the Uttarakhand High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of State of Uttarakhand v 1. Mehtab s/o Tahir Hassan 2. Sushil @Bhura s/o Gulab Singh Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2014 on April 27, 2018
this article helps you knowing how to become a criminal lawyer
helps you to know adultery and its types
In the landmark case of Manoj Singh Pawar v State of Uttarakhand & others Writ Petition (PIL) No. 156 of 2016 which was delivered on June 18, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a slew of landmark directions
Scope and ambit of Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act,1872
Victims of Crime Can Seek Cancellation of Bail: MP HC in Mahesh Pahade vs State of MP
State of Orissa v Mahimananda Mishra said clearly and convincingly that the court must not go deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail and all that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused.
Yashwant v Maharashtra while the conviction of some police officers involved in a custodial torture which led to the death of a man was upheld, the Apex Court underscored on the need to develop and recognize the concept of democratic policing wherein crime control is not the only end, but the means to achieve this order is also equally important.
20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter. Upheld acquittals of 21 other accused, holding that there was insufficient evidence to establish their guilt. So it was but natural that they had to be acquitted
No person accused of an offence punishable for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless
Accident under section 80 under the Indian Penal Code falls under the chapter of general exceptions. This article was made with the objective of keeping in mind the students of law who are nowadays in dire need of material which simplify the law than complicating it.
Nishan Singh v State of Punjab. Has ordered one Nishan Singh Brar, convicted of abduction and rape of a minor victim girl, and his mother Navjot Kaur to pay Rs 90 lakh towards compensation.
Rajesh Sharma v State of UP to regulate the purported gross misuse of Section 498A IPC have been modified just recently in a latest judgment titled Social Action Forum Manav for Manav Adhikar and another v Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others.
Kodungallur Film Society vs. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. Those who indulge in it and those who instigate it must all be held clearly accountable and made to pay for what they have done most shamefully.
Ram Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated. Absolutely right There can be no denying it
Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. It invalidated the Section 497 of IPC as a violation of Articles 14 and 15 and under Article 21 of the Constitution
Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) represented through Legal Representatives v/s Karnataka, Had no hesitation to concede right from the start while underscoring the rights of victims of crime that, The rights of victims of crime is a subject that has, unfortunately, only drawn sporadic attention of Parliament, the judiciary and civil society.
State of Kerala v Rasheed observed that while deciding an application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence. The Apex Court in this landmark judgment also listed out practical guidelines.
Reena Hazarika v State of Assam that a solemn duty is cast on the court in the dispensation of justice to adequately consider the defence of the accused taken under Section 313 CrPC and to either accept or reject the same for reasons specified in writing.
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors v UP has set aside the trial court judgment that had acquitted 16 Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) officials in the 1987 Hashimpur mass murder case. The Delhi High Court has convicted all the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v Maharashtra it was held that the Special Leave Petitions filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.
Shambhir & Ors v State upholding the conviction and punishment of over 80 rioters has brought some solace to all those affected people who lost their near and dear ones in the ghastly 1984 anti-Sikh riots which brought disrepute to our country and alienated many Sikhs from the national mainstream
Naman Singh alias Naman Pratap Singh and another vs. UP, Supreme Court held a reading of the FIR reveals that the police has registered the F.I.R on directions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was clearly impermissible in the law.
It has been a long and gruelling wait of 34 long years for the survivors of 1984 anti-Sikh riots to finally see one big leader Sajjan Kumar being sentenced to life term by Delhi High Court
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v State of Maharashtra held that criminals are also entitled to life of dignity and probability of reformation/rehabilitation to be seriously and earnestly considered before awarding death sentence. It will help us better understand and appreciate the intricacies of law.
Sukhlal v The State of Madhya Pradesh 'life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception' has laid down clearly that even when a crime is heinous or brutal, it may not still fall under the rarest of rare category.
Deepak v State of Madhya Pradesh in which has served to clarify the entire legal position under Section 319 CrPC, upheld a trial court order under Section 319 of the CrPc summoning accused who were in the past discharged by it ignoring the supplementary charge sheet against them.
It has to be said right at the outset that in a major reprieve for all the political leaders accused of being involved in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, in CBI, Mumbai vs Dahyaji Goharji Vanzara
Devi Lal v State of Rajasthan the Supreme Court has dispelled all misconceived notions about suspicion and reiterated that,
Madhya Pradesh v Kalyan Singh has finally set all doubts to rest on the nagging question of whether offences under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Dr Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v Maharashtra made it amply clear that if a person had not made the promise to marry with the sole intention to seduce a woman to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (Abetment of Suicide) is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Nand Kishore v Madhya Pradesh has commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence which was earlier confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court of a convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.
Raju Jagdish Paswan v. Maharashtra has commuted the death penalty of a man accused of rape and murder of a nine year old girl and sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment without remission.
Swapan Kumar Chatterjee v CBI permitting the application filed by the prosecution for summoning a hand writing expert in a corruption case of which the trial had started in 1985. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases
Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Importance of motive in determining the culpability of the accused but refused to acknowledge it as the sole criteria for not convicting the accused in the absence of motive.
Gagan Kumar v Punjab it is a mandatory legal requirement for Magistrate to specify whether sentences awarded to an accused convicted for two or more offences, would run concurrently or consecutively.
Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar v Maharashtra Even poem can help save a death convict from gallows. The Apex Court has in this latest, landmark and laudable judgment commuted the death penalty of a kidnap cum murder convict who was just 22 years of age at the time of occurrence
Himachal Pradesh v Vijay Kumar Supreme court held about acid attack crime that a crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency.
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Imprisonment Appears To Be An Altogether Inappropriate Punishment: SC
S. Sreesanth v. The Board of Control For Cricket In India the Supreme Court set aside a life ban imposed on former Indian cricketer S Sreesanth in connection with the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal and asked the BCCI Disciplinary Committee to take a fresh call on the quantum of his punishment under the Anti-Corruption Code.
Adding Additional Accused To Invoke Section 319 CrPC Stronger Evidence Than Mere Probability of Complicity of A Person Required: SC stated in Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab
Top