SC raps Bengal govt on ‘disturbing’ CBI report

The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed strong disapproval of West Bengal’s handling of the initial investigation into the brutal rape and murder of a 31-year-old doctor at Kolkata’s RG Kar Hospital last month, stating it was “disturbed” by lacunae found in the probe that it said raised questions of evidence tampering and police complicity.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud directed the state to ensure that local police cooperate fully with the Central Bureau of Investigation, which is now probing the case, directing that the state must provide all evidence required by the agency, including complete footage from the hospital’s CCTV.
“What CBI has disclosed in its status report is worse! It is really disturbing…We are ourselves disturbed by what happened,” said the bench, adding that there were questions about possible destruction of evidence, non-seizure of crucial items and complicity of other persons that the agency was looking into. The court refrained from disclosing the lines of the investigation because that could derail the further probe, but asked the state to ascertain that the entire CCTV footage is handed over to CBI.
The bench, also comprising justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, came down heavily on the state for issuing a notification that prevented women doctors from working night shifts or for more than 12 hours a day, calling the move discriminatory and violative of the constitutional principles of gender equality. The court’s censure forced the state government to concede that it will withdraw the contentious stipulations in the August notification.
The court further recorded that the striking junior doctors are ready to return to work, provided their general body approves it and that the confidence-building measures, agreed upon during their meeting with chief minister Mamata Banerjee on Monday evening, are put in place. It observed that junior doctors “do not get any pleasure in abstaining from work” but that they are striking because of “insecure premises” and “unsafe working conditions” which the state government is obligated to take care of.
The development came a day after a five-hour meeting between Banerjee and junior doctors in Kolkata appeared to break the deadlock after 38 days of strike, with the state ceding almost all demands of the agitators. The second-year postgraduate student was found dead on the hospital premises on August 9. A Kolkata Police civic volunteer, Sanjoy Roy, was arrested by the city police a day after the crime. The case, now under CBI, has stirred massive protests across the state.
“Disturbed” over investigation
The top court, which has been monitoring investigations into the case after it registered proceedings on its own motion (suo motu), questioned the West Bengal government after solicitor general (SG) Tushar Mehta, appearing for CBI, presented a status report which apparently brought to light a series of flaws in the investigation, including the fact that the victim’s clothes were not even sent for the post-mortem.
The bench expressed its serious concern after reviewing CBI’s status report on the investigation, which raised questions about evidence tampering and police complicity, leading to the arrest of the station house officer (SHO) of the area.
Senior counsel Indira Jaising, representing the junior doctors, informed the court that certain individuals, who had no business being at the crime scene, were present, and their names would be confidentially shared with CBI. The bench directed CBI to maintain a channel of communication with the victim’s family to address their concerns.
SG Mehta assured the court that despite the five-day delay in transferring the investigation to CBI, the agency would ensure that no evidence is destroyed and that any benefits do not accrue to the accused.
Policy to restrict women doctors’ shifts criticised
The court castigated the West Bengal’s August 19 notification that barred women doctors from working at night and for more than 12-hour shifts due to concerns over their safety, labelling it unconstitutional.
“How can you tell women doctors that they can’t work at night? Women don’t need concessions; they need equal opportunities. Whether it’s pilots, the armed forces, or police officers, women work round-the-clock, and you must provide the necessary security infrastructure,” asserted the bench after senior counsel Haripriya Padmanabhan brought the issue to the notice of the bench.
Senior counsel Kapil Sibal, representing the state, justified the policy, stating that it was implemented due to a shortage of security personnel. However, the court rebuffed this argument, stating, “The solution is to provide adequate security personnel, not restrict women from performing their duties.” Sibal then agreed to withdraw the contentious clauses.
”Women doctors don’t need special concession but safety and security for them to work and thus, such conditions would impose obstacles in their medical career. Moreover, it would be inappropriate if women or men are given concession for hours of duty,” the court order noted.
Confidence building measures
During the proceedings, the bench underscored that doctors’ grievances over their safety were legitimate, even as it put on record that a meeting was held between the protesters and the chief minister a day ago, and some terms of agreement reached.
Recognising that the junior doctors had shown willingness to return to work following the meeting with the CM, the court recorded a statement by senior counsel Indira Jaising that a general body meeting of doctors would soon take place to decide on formally calling off the strike.
“Ms Jaising says that with all the confidence-building measures taken by the state and those being put in place, doctors should not have any problem resuming work. She added that junior doctors will approach the general body so that a broad consensus can be arrived at for their return to work,” the bench stated in its order.
While Sibal sought a statement from Jaising regarding the date of the general body meeting and the resumption of duties by the junior doctors, Jaising refused to indicate any timeline.
Security in government hospitals
The court also took note of the ongoing agitation and recorded the terms of a settlement between the doctors and the state government on Monday. It directed the state to expedite the process of upgrading security and infrastructure in government hospitals, including the installation of CCTV cameras, biometric systems and additional police personnel.
“Government hospitals are particularly vulnerable, and young doctors, many of whom are fresh out of college, are justified in feeling insecure. The state must take immediate measures to address their concerns,” said the bench.
Sibal informed the court that ₹100 crore was sanctioned for upgrading hospital infrastructure, including restrooms and security arrangements, across the state’s hospitals.
Safety of women doctors
Senior advocate Karuna Nundy, appearing for senior doctors, raised serious concerns over the safety of doctors, particularly women, noting that the alleged perpetrator of the crime was a civic volunteer employed at the hospital.
“The presence of contractual staff in sensitive areas of hospitals, especially around female doctors, is a major security lapse,” Nundy said. The court agreed with this observation and called for a review of the deployment of civic volunteers in hospitals.
The bench remarked: “You cannot have security entrusted to contractual staff. The alleged crime was committed by a volunteer. If we are going to have another set of people contractual staff walking around the hospital, what do we say about the safety of women doctors,” the bench told Sibal, who agreed to convey the court’s concerns to the state government.
The bench also dismissed an application that sought the removal of Banerjee as CM, warning the lawyer involved against using the court as a political forum.
“This is not a political platform, alright? Your statements must follow the rules of legal discipline. We are not here to address your opinions about a political figure. Your interim application is beyond our purview,” the court said.
Sibal requested that the live streaming of the case be halted, but the court declined. “We will not stop the livestreaming. It is in the public interest,” retoretd CJI Chandrachud.
Sibal also informed the court that lawyers in his chambers were receiving rape threats and threats of physical violence for representing West Bengal in the case. The Bench responded with reassurance, stating: “If there are any threats to any man or woman, we will step in.”