Calcutta HC bench recuses itself from PIL against ex-Commissioner Vineet Goyal in RG Kar case

The Calcutta High Court division bench, comprising Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Chaitali Chatterjee, on Thursday recused itself from hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed against former Kolkata Police Commissioner Vineet Goyal. The PIL alleges that Goyal publicly disclosed the identity of the R G Kar Medical College rape and murder victim, violating legal provisions.

The bench stated that it was stepping away from the case due to “personal reasons” and confirmed that the matter would be reassigned to another bench. The PIL was filed in September 2024, a month after the incident, when Goyal was serving as Kolkata’s Police Commissioner. He was later transferred to the post of Additional Director General (ADG) of the Special Task Force (STF) in the West Bengal Police.

The victim, a post-graduate trainee doctor, was found dead in the seminar hall of R G Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9. Both the Supreme Court and the Calcutta High Court had earlier issued directives prohibiting the disclosure of the victim’s identity. The investigation into the case was initially handled by the Kolkata Police, which arrested civic volunteer Sanjay Roy as the primary accused.

However, the Calcutta High Court later transferred the probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). In January 2025, the Sealdah court sentenced Roy to life imprisonment until death. The CBI subsequently filed a plea seeking the death penalty, while a similar appeal by the state government was rejected by the High Court. The Calcutta High Court had initially refrained from hearing the PIL, citing that related matters were pending before the Supreme Court.

However, the petitioner’s counsel later informed the High Court that the Supreme Court had not taken any action in this particular case. Following this clarification, the High Court admitted the PIL, allowing legal proceedings to continue. With the recusal of the Chief Justice and Justice Chatterjee, the PIL is now expected to be reassigned to a different bench. The timeline for the next hearing and further proceedings will be determined once a new bench is constituted.