The Calcutta High Court harshly criticized the West Bengal government on Friday in connection with the RG Kar Medical College Hospital rape and murder incident, and consequently transferred the vandalism case at the hospital to the CBI. The investigation concerning the rape and murder of the trainee doctor, Moumita Debnath, was already under the supervision of the central probe agency.

The state's representation mentioned that the police attempted to confront the mob but were significantly outnumbered by an estimated 7000 individuals, rendering them unable to halt the onslaught, further noting that numerous police officers sustained injuries during the event. In response, the court questioned the efficacy of the police, questioning how they could safeguard doctors and hospital staff if they are unable to protect themselves.

Dissatisfied with the state's explanations, the court went as far as to threaten the closure of the hospital, suggesting that patients might need to be transferred to another facility. This declaration came from the division bench comprising Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya during a session addressing the attack, which coincided with a demonstration by doctors and students seeking justice for Moumita Debnath on 14th August.

Detailing the attack, the state counsel reported that approximately 7000 individuals stormed the hospital, with the crowd rapidly expanding. Despite the police's efforts, which included the deployment of tear gas, the mob dismantled the barricades and inflicted extensive damage on the hospital. The state's counsel highlighted that the chaos resulted in injuries to 15 police officers, severe injuries to the DCP, damage to police vehicles, and the ransacking of the hospital’s emergency room.

The Calcutta High Court, presided over by Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam, expressed deep concerns over the apparent lack of forewarning by the police intelligence regarding the large-scale mob attack at RG Kar Medical College Hospital. "Normally the police always has an intelligence wing. Similar things happened on Hanuman Jayanti. If 7000 people are to gather, it's hard to believe the state police did not know," remarked Chief Justice Sivagnanam. The discussion intensified when it was revealed that no official permission had been granted for the assembly, prompting the court to question the absence of preventive legal measures such as the implementation of section 144 of CrPC, given the turmoil already underway. "You pass 144 CrPC orders for any reason, when so much commotion is going on, you should have cordoned the area," the Chief Justice stated.

Further adding to the scrutiny, the sudden nighttime assembly of the mob led the Chief Justice to label the incident as "this is an absolute failure of state machinery." The court criticized the police's inability to safeguard their own forces during the chaos, highlighting a grave concern for the safety of medical professionals. "They couldn’t protect their own men? Sorry state of affairs. How will these doctors work fearlessly?" questioned the chief justice, underscoring the lack of prior protective measures.

In a telling revelation, Senior Advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya detailed subsequent actions taken at the hospital post the legal intervention. "They demolished a portion after the order of the HC. In the night, when there was a demonstration, there was a speech by the CM. In the dead of night, hooligans attacked the place of demonstration by the doctors. Then they vandalised the hospital and the police. The police hid behind the demonstrators," reported Advocate Bhattacharya. He further elucidated on the premeditated nature of the attack, noting a mix-up in the mob's target location within the hospital which inadvertently led to the preservation of the crime scene. The assailants confused the third floor with the second due to a linguistic difference, as the third floor is referred to as the fourth storey in Bengali. This error, according to the advocate, confirmed the planned aspect of the assault.

In a tense exchange, the state counsel attempted to justify the hospital's demolition, claiming it did not occur near the crime scene. However, the court was quick to question the rationale behind such immediate demolition for renovation purposes, especially during an ongoing investigation. The court highlighted the lack of basic amenities in many government buildings, such as district courts that still require ladies' washrooms, questioning the necessity of starting renovations at the hospital at this critical juncture.

Frustrated with the state's explanations, the court expressed its readiness to take drastic measures, "we will close down the hospital. We will shift everyone. Close the hospital." The judges then inquired about the number of patients currently housed in the facility. Although the state assured that the crime scene had been secured, the court remained skeptical, noting the broader implications of the attack on law enforcement, "the attack on police shows failure of law and order situation."

The court pondered the preventability of the vandalism, "could this vandalism had been prevented is the question. Who did it comes later. What is the reason to break all facilities. Can never be understood. The police are also injured. Therefore, had the law and order failed? Something is required to inspire our confidence. The issue is that if this thing which happened on 14th, what will happen if it is repeated? If police got injured and couldn’t stop the mob, the law and order situation had failed?"

Amid the proceedings, when the counsel of the principal disclosed threats to his residence, the court advised him to stay home, ensuring state protection, "state is with you, they will give you 400-500 police people. Or you make an application, we will give you central forces."

Ultimately, the court decided to transfer the investigation of the mob attack to the CBI, instructing local police to document the sequence of events meticulously. "We direct those in charge of the hospital to narrate the state of affairs over there," the court stated, further ordering the CBI’s investigative team to submit an interim report on their findings.

Background

RG Kar hospital recently witnessed a horrific incident: the rape and murder of a 2nd Year PG medical student, which occurred last week, sparking massive protests nationwide. This tragic event led the High Court to transfer the investigation of the doctor's rape and murder to the CBI. The transfer took place just a day before another incident of vandalism at the same hospital, highlighting the urgency and sensitivity surrounding the case.

The decision to move the investigation to the CBI was made after it was determined that the state police had not been proactive in their investigative duties and that the state administration did not appear to be supporting the victim or her family adequately. "The High Court transferred the investigation into the gruesome incident to the CBI, upon noting that the state police had not been proactive in the investigation of the incident and the state administration was not 'with the victim or her parents.'"

Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya, comprising the division bench, were overseeing multiple pleas at the time, including a critical one from the victim’s parents who were seeking to have the case handled by an independent agency, indicating a lack of confidence in the local police's handling of the matter. Their concerns about the progress of the state-controlled investigation were palpable.

In a notable development during the preliminary inquiry, the Kolkata Police arrested a 'civic volunteer' affiliated with the local police force. This arrest, however, has been criticized and labeled as a potential diversion. The counsel for the victim's family argued that the state police's investigation was flawed, accusing them of attempting to deflect blame by scapegoating the arrested individual, thereby obscuring the true circumstances surrounding the crime.

The unfolding tragedy at RG Kar Medical College continued to reveal distressing details as presented by Senior Advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, representing the bereaved parents. The parents, thrown into a nightmare, were initially informed via a phone call that their daughter had merely fallen ill. Upon their frantic arrival at the college, they were met with the devastating news of her supposed suicide—a claim complicated further by the authorities' refusal to let them view her body for three hours.

The court's response to these proceedings underscored the severity of the mishandling of the case. It sharply criticized the initial categorization by the police of the incident as an "unnatural death" and pointed out the inaction of the college's principal and other authorities in facilitating the investigation. In a decisive move, the court ordered the principal to be put on indefinite leave pending further investigation, highlighting the administration's failure to engage constructively in the process.

The legal proceedings took on a complex tone as the court acknowledged the peculiar nature of the facts surrounding the case. Given the gravity and the unusual circumstances, the court supported the parents' urgent request to expedite investigative measures. It expressed concerns that any further delays could lead to the potential destruction of vital evidence, thus compromising the pursuit of justice for their daughter.