A crammed Court Room Number One, the Supreme Court Chief Justice’s court, was tense and buzzing with anticipation on Thursday, August 22. Senior counsels, the Solicitor General, and a curious janta alike waited for the second hearing of a suo moto case concerning the brutal rape and murder of a postgraduate trainee doctor at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata.
Once seated, the three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud (CJI), issued a stern directive to protesting doctors, urging them to return to their duties. The courtroom’s atmosphere was thick with anticipation as the CJI made it clear that a doctors’ strike could not continue without having severely adverse consequences on the nation’s public health system.
“There are people who have been waiting for months for an appointment,” said the CJI, adding that the court was empathetic to the doctors’ plight. Taking note of the gruelling work conditions faced by doctors in public hospitals, SC acknowledged that such conditions could make them vulnerable to abuse and assault.
“I have slept on the floor of a government hospital while waiting for a relative’s treatment to be done— I have seen how you all work, sometimes for 24-40 hours at a time,” the CJI said.
However, the apex court's impatience was tangible as the bench listened to concerns raised by Karuna Nundy, who represented a group of AIIMS resident doctors, regarding their ongoing protests. The doctors, through Nundy, alleged that their leaves was deducted, that they had been barred from taking their exams, and they feared retaliation for their legitimate protesting of violence inflicted on one of their own.
The CJI was, nonetheless, unambiguously replied, “Let them all return to work. We will pass some general orders, please rest assured that once doctors resume duties, we will prevail upon the authorities to not take adverse actions. How will the public administrative structure run if they don't resume work?”
The packed courtroom grew quiet as Justice J B Pardiwala, said that the investigation’s procedural anomalies were startling observation. "I have not come across such a procedure in my entire life as a lawyer or judge," he said, casting suspicion on the conduct of the Kolkata Police.
The timing of key legal formalities—particularly the post-mortem conducted hours before an official registration of the victim's unnatural death—drew the court’s sharp criticism.
"How was it that the post-mortem was conducted at 6:10 p.m. on August 9, yet the unnatural death information was only sent to Tala police station at 11:30 p.m. that same day? This is extremely disturbing," Pardiwala J asked, his voice echoing in the otherwise hushed courtroom.
As the hearing progressed, the tension between the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the West Bengal State (WB) counsel Kapil Sibal, which reared its head many times during the previous hearing on August 20, escalated.
While in the last hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the CBI, had said he did not want an action done by “such an animal of a man” to be politicised, the SG had added that the Director General Police Kolkata (DG) Rajeev Kumar resign and a new person be appointed in his stead. “He is under the scanner for evidence tampering in the Sharada case as well,” said Mehta, referring to the 2019 allegations against Kumar in the scam that affected almost two million depositors. Mehta then had also said that he “would be okay with the WB Government appointing anyone else of their choosing.”
On Thursday, Mehta accused WB state officials of political interference, alleging that a sitting minister of West Bengal had made incendiary remarks on social media threatening those who spoke against the state’s leadership.
“We have the statement of a sitting minister of West Bengal. He says that if anything is talked against our leader, fingers will be chopped off,” Mehta claimed.
Sibal shot back: “‘Bullets will be fired,’ is what Suvendu Adhikari said.” Adhikari is a BJP MLA in West Bengal.
The exchanges between the two sides became so heated that CJI Chandrachud had to step in to calm the frayed nerves. “Please don’t politicise this, the law will take its course,” he said, proceeding to bring back the focus to the case at hand.
Adding to the courtroom drama, the bench named another hospital official whose conduct during the investigation it deemed "suspect." This further fuelled the court's growing suspicion of a cover-up, and increased the pressure on state authorities to deliver a transparent investigation.
The CJI assured representatives of various doctors' associations, including the Federation of Association of Medical Associations of India (FAIMA) and the Delhi Medical Association, that the National Task Force (NTF) would address their grievances. The SC has constituted and tasked the NTF with recommending safety measures for healthcare professionals nationwide.
The bench, reflecting on the broader implications of the incident, emphasised that doctors that no one must harass those who are protesting peacefully against the crime. The CJI called for the creation of a portal under the NTF to allow healthcare professionals to anonymously report security concerns. The court also directed the Union Health Secretary to convene a meeting with the Chief Secretaries and police chiefs of states and Union Territories to discuss the implementation of security measures in public hospitals.
In its closing remarks, the Supreme Court sharply criticised Kolkata Police on the delay in registering the unnatural death, calling it "extremely disturbing." The court directed the Kolkata Police officer who registered the first entry about the incident to appear before its bench next Tuesday, August 27, for the next hearing. This directive emphasised the apex court's intent to leave no stone unturned in its quest for justice in the case, and for better working conditions and safety for medical professionals across India.
As the hearing concluded, the courtroom buzzed with murmurs, the gravity of the court’s orders hanging in the air. The Supreme Court's stern warnings and the heightened scrutiny of the state’s actions signal a determined push towards accountability and justice for the young doctor whose life was tragically cut short.
