Supreme Court turns down appeal to transfer RG Kar trial outside Bengal; Counsel of victim’s parents question if there are attempts to stall the trial by “strangers”

The Supreme Court of India on Thursday turned down a verbal submission and refused to transfer the RG Kar trial pertaining to the rape and murder of a medical student, outside the state of West Bengal. Responding to a submission made by Sr Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, CJI DY Chandrachud said that such a direction will cast “doubts on the legitimacy” of the judiciary. The CJI refused to entertain the plea even after being reminded of such precedents existing.

“The trial is about to commence. The trial may shift out of West Bengal keeping in mind the disturbing features in the case. There are precedents”, said Sr Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani. CJI DY Chandrachud immediately interjected and admitted that while matters from Manipur had once been shifted to Assam yet the RG Kar case will not be transferred outside West Bengal. “Here we are not doing that. Let the trial continue before the district court. Otherwise we will be casting doubts on the legitimacy of our own judicial system”, CJI added.

Interestingly, Sr Advocate Geeta Luthra representing the victim’s parents, strongly objected to the appeal and questioned if such submissions are attempted to stall the trial that is otherwise meant to commence from November 11. She had even questioned the locus standi of the counsels making such submissions. The West Bengal BJP leader of opposition Suvendu Adhikari while reacting on accused Sanjay Roy’s remark claiming innocence, on Monday, had suggested that if the trial could be shifted out of Kolkata for fair investigation.

“It is matter of concern, strangers who are not connected with the matter- somebody wants to stall the matter, somebody wants the trial be shifted. An order has been passed for recording of prosecution evidence on day to day basis starting from Monday, November 11. Why is there interest of strangers to stop that? When the supplementary chargesheet is filed, if required, to alter or amend the charge, that there is the power under BNSS which will be exercised, if required,” Sr Advocate Luthra stated. The state government counsel Rakesh Diwedi expressed similar aspersions if such submissions could stall the trial.

“Any observation on this may dislocate the trial and we don’t want that. The district could has ample powers to direct further investigation, if needed”, the CJI concluded while confirming that the Supreme Court will not interfere into the trial procedure or wrest the trial powers from the district judge. CJI even wondered if there is a faction that doesn’t want the trial to begin.

A 31 year old PGT medical student was brutalised, raped and murdered at RG Kar medical college and hospital in Kolkata on August 9, stoking nationwide protests demanding penal actions and accountability. Supreme Court had taken suo moto cognisance of the case and heard the matter for the first time on August 20. On Thursday CBI had filed their sixth status report pertaining to the investigation. Supreme Court directed the CBI to continue with the investigation and file a fresh status report in the next four weeks

What Happened In SC Today

Phiroze Edulji, Advocate: CBI hasn’t produced the chargesheet before the court till date. 90 days have passed and what they have done is nothing. They have just endorsed what the Kolkata Police have said.

Geeta Luthra, Sr Advocate representing the victim’s parents: the trial I about to commence. There is a charge sheet that has been filed. The district judge has ample powers under BNSS.

CJI DY Chandrachud: The charge sheet has been filed. The charges have been framed. The trial judge has sufficient powers to pass directions if further investigation is necessary. We don’t want to run that task ourselves. When he goes through the evidences, he has ample powers to pass directions. We cannot cast doubts on our own judiciary. That will dislocate the trial.

Mahesh Jethmalani: The trial is about to commence. The trial may be shifted out of West Bengal keeping in mind the disturbing features in the case. There are precedents.

CJI: I know there are precedents; we have shifted matters out of Manipur to Assam. But here we are not doing that. Let the trial continue before the district court. Otherwise we will be casting doubts on the legitimacy of our own judicial system.

Geeta Luthra, Sr Advocate representing the victim’s parents: It is matter of concern, strangers who are not connected with the matter- somebody wants to stall the matter, somebody wants the trial be shifted.

Phiroze Edulji Advocate: It is self contradictory. On one hand CBI is saying that there is a sole accused.

Menaka Guruswamy, Sr Advocate: Who does Mr Edulji represent?

CJI: We are not doing that. It seems there are factions that don’t want the trial to proceed. Let the trial start and the trial judge take charge.

Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr Advocate representing State Govt of West Bengal: There is an attempt to stall the trial.

Geeta Luthra, Sr Advocate representing the victim’s parents: An order has been passed for recording of prosecution evidence on day to day basis starting from Monday, November 11. Why is there interest of strangers to stop that? When the supplementary chargesheet is filed, if required, to alter or amend the charge, that there is the power under BNSS which will be exercised, if required.​