New Delhi:
The Supreme Courtroom at the moment deep dived into the occasions at Kolkata’s RG Kar Hospital on Day One — after the invention of the physique of the 31-year-old physician who was raped and murdered. And at each step, the judges identified discrepancies and anomalies that had been extra absorbing than any in style whodunit.
Specifically, the courtroom’s queries had been round three factors: The massive time lag between discovery of the physique and the lodging of the First Information Report; the loss of life being referred to as unnatural even after a postmortem examination; the sealing of the crime scene after greater than 12 hours. All these, the judges indicated, has contributed to an image of a really distorted investigation.
The ball was set rolling by Solicitor Basic Tushar Mehta.
Representing the Central Bureau of Investigation, the senior advocate began by choosing holes within the timeline of occasions introduced by the West Bengal authorities. He stated what “stunned him essentially the most” was the submitting of the First Info Report at 11.45 pm, after the cremation of the physique.
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, who was main the three-judge bench, stated what intrigued him was that the police filed a Basic Diary at 10.10 am, turned up, however sealed the crime scene at 10.10 pm. “What was taking place there in all that point?” he stated.
As soon as the state clarified the postmortem was completed by 7.10 pm and admitted that the criticism of unnatural loss of life was filed by 11:30 pm.
Justice JB Pardiwala stated, “Was it an uncommon loss of life? In that case, what was the necessity for an post-mortem? Right here we will see that at 11:30 pm, an uncommon loss of life criticism is filed. And the FIR was filed after quarter-hour? Give correct data to the courtroom”.
Because the state remained silent, he stated, “Don’t create confusion this fashion. Have a accountable police officer right here on the subsequent listening to”.
“Who’s the Assistant Superintendent of Police? There are doubts about his position within the investigation. How did he conduct such an investigation?” he added.
Justice Manoj Mishra chimed in, saying when the postmortem was completed on the night of August 9, how may the police nonetheless file a First Info Report on unnatural loss of life.
When the state clarified that unnatural loss of life was first recorded within the Basic Diary at 1.45 pm, the choose requested at what time the investigation began. When the state responded that it was at 3.45 pm, Justice Pardiwala ripped into the police.
“I’ve never seen such investigation in my 30 years of legal career,” he stated. “If you happen to filed a case of unnatural loss of life earlier than post-mortem, what was the bottom? When you’ve got filed an unnatural loss of life case after the post-mortem, why did you achieve this? The post-mortem is over and the reason for loss of life,” he added.
After the recess, the courtroom’s consideration turned once more to the delay in submitting of the FIR.
“The physique was recovered at 9:30 am. And FIR was filed at 11:30 pm. FIR about 14 hours later! Why was the FIR filed 14 hours late? I am unable to discover any motive for it,” Justice Chandrachud stated.
The state had earlier defined {that a} case of unnatural loss of life is normally filed when there is no such thing as a formal criticism. The courtroom had stated it’s the obligation of the top of the establishment in such circumstances to lodge a proper criticism.
“Why did the Principal not come to file the FIR? Was anybody stopping him? Why was he transferred to a different hospital? The courtroom needs to know the explanation for all this,” Justice Chandrachud questioned once more at the moment.
Former Principal Sandip Ghosh has been questioned by the CBI daily for every week. Officers stated he has not been in a position to give passable solutions to their queries thus far. The company has filed a standing report of their investigation to the highest courtroom at the moment, the contents of which has not been made public.
The case will likely be heard subsequent on September 5.
