West Bengal Govt Petitions Calcutta HC for Death Penalty in RG Kar Doctor Murder Case

West Bengal Govt Petitions Calcutta HC for Death Penalty in RG Kar Doctor Murder Case

Major Details in Tabular Format

DetailInformation
CaseRape and murder of a doctor at R.G. Kar Medical College
ConvictSanjay Roy
Initial VerdictLife imprisonment by Additional District and Sessions Judge Anirban Das
Date of Initial VerdictJanuary 20, 2025
AppealWest Bengal Government seeks death penalty
Appeal Filed OnJanuary 21, 2025
Representing Advocate GeneralKishor Datta
Judges Hearing AppealJustice Debangsu Basak and Justice Mohammad Shabbar Rashidi
VictimPost-graduate trainee doctor
Incident DateAugust 9, 2024
Crime DetailsBody found in seminar room of R.G. Kar Medical College; charges include rape and murder
Investigation AuthorityCentral Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
Key Legislation ReferencedAparajita Women and Child (West Bengal Criminal Laws Amendment) Bill, 2024
Government StanceAdvocates for death penalty citing “rarest of rare” doctrine
Sessions Court RationaleDenied capital punishment citing need for justice through wisdom and compassion
Chief Minister’s ReactionCriticized sessions court verdict, termed it lenient, and called for stricter punishment
Past Precedents in West BengalCapital punishment awarded in similar cases in Kultali, Farakka, and Gurap

Full News Article

Pratidin Time
22 Jan 2025, 10:20 IST
Follow Us

West Bengal government has moved Calcutta High Court seeking death penalty for Sanjay Roy, convicted of raping and murdering a doctor at R.G. Kar Medical College. Advocate General Kishor Datta filed appeal on Tuesday, January 21, 2025, challenging life imprisonment verdict issued by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sealdah, Anirban Das, just a day earlier.

This legal maneuver follows strong reactions from West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, who expressed deep dissatisfaction with life imprisonment sentence. She questioned deterrence value of such a punishment in heinous crimes. Banerjee argued that murder and rape of young doctor represented one of “rarest of rare” cases, warranting no leniency.

In her statement, Banerjee commented, “What is meaning of a life sentence? In many cases, culprits are released on parole even after committing heinous crimes. Such judgments send wrong message to society.” Banerjee’s administration has emphasized its commitment to ensuring justice for victim and her family. She also highlighted pending Aparajita Women and Child (West Bengal Criminal Laws Amendment) Bill, 2024, which seeks stricter penalties, including death sentence, for such crimes.

sessions court verdict, delivered on January 20, 2025, sentenced Sanjay Roy to life imprisonment but rejected death penalty, arguing that case did not meet stringent “rarest of rare” criteria. Judge Anirban Das emphasized importance of moving beyond punitive justice based on principle of retribution. “Justice cannot be reduced to primitive instinct of a life for a life,” judgment read, adding that life imprisonment is a severe punishment in itself.

This decision, however, did not sit well with victim’s parents or West Bengal government. victim’s family expressed their disappointment, asserting that only capital punishment would serve as a fitting response to crime and act as a deterrent for potential offenders.

Sanjay Roy, a former civic police volunteer, was arrested after victim’s body was discovered in seminar room of State-run hospital on August 9, 2024. Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which was tasked with investigation, charged Roy with both rape and murder under sections of Indian Penal Code. evidence presented in sessions court included DNA matching and CCTV footage linking Roy to crime scene.

Despite substantial evidence and public outrage, sessions court chose life imprisonment over death penalty. judgment sparked immediate debates on judicial discretion, particularly in cases of gender-based violence.

Chief Minister Banerjee’s call for a harsher penalty also drew attention to three previous cases in West Bengal where courts had awarded death penalty. These cases, from Kultali (South 24 Parganas), Farakka (Murshidabad), and Gurap (Hooghly), were cited as precedents to argue that similar crimes warranted uniform punishment. “Society cannot show humanity to those who commit inhuman acts,” Banerjee said in her address.

Aparajita Women and Child (West Bengal Criminal Laws Amendment) Bill, 2024, was introduced in state assembly last year but is awaiting approval from central government. bill advocates stricter punishments for crimes against women and children, including death penalty for certain categories of offenses. Banerjee lamented delay in its approval, hinting at systemic inefficiencies that hinder timely justice.

Advocate General Kishor Datta presented appeal before a Division Bench comprising Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Mohammad Shabbar Rashidi. Legal experts believe that outcome of this appeal could significantly influence public confidence in judiciary and set an important precedent for handling cases involving gender-based violence.

victim’s family, still reeling from tragedy, joined hands with advocacy groups to demand stricter enforcement of laws and faster legal proceedings in such cases. “Our daughter was a bright, young doctor with her entire life ahead of her. This crime was not just against her but against society,” said victim’s father in an emotional statement.

CBI’s role in investigation also came under scrutiny during proceedings. Chief Minister Banerjee openly criticized agency, suggesting that case might have seen quicker resolution and harsher punishment had it been handled under purview of state government. “Had it been under our jurisdiction, we would have ensured death penalty long back,” Banerjee remarked.

appeal now places spotlight on Calcutta High Court as it evaluates whether case meets parameters for “rarest of rare” classification. Legal analysts are closely watching developments, given their implications for criminal jurisprudence in India.

Disclaimer

above news article is a factual representation based on available reports and court proceedings as of January 22, 2025. content is for informational purposes and does not intend to influence ongoing legal processes or public opinion. Readers are encouraged to rely on official court statements for verified updates.

Comments

No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *