Sealdah Court dismisses several "baseless" claims by Abhaya's parents against RG Kar Principal

The Sealdah Court has dismissed several claims made by the victim's family as "baseless" in the ongoing RG Kar rape and murder case, which centers around the death of a female doctor at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital. The victim's body was found on August 9, 2024, leading to an investigation into her rape and subsequent murder. During the trial, the victim's family raised various concerns regarding the handling of the case, particularly criticizing the actions of the then Principal of RG Kar Medical College, Sandip Ghosh, after the incident.

One of the key allegations made by the victim's family was that Ghosh's failure to meet with them following the discovery of the victim’s body was an indication of his involvement in the crime. The family claimed that Ghosh should have personally met with them to express condolences or offer support. However, Judge Anirban Das, in his ruling, dismissed this claim, emphasizing that Ghosh’s failure to meet the family did not establish any wrongdoing on his part. The court also noted that the victim's father had been offered a chance to meet with Ghosh, but he had declined the offer.

Another issue raised by the victim's family involved the seizure of items related to the case. The family’s lawyer argued that the seizure should have been conducted under the supervision of a Judicial Magistrate. Judge Das rejected this argument, stating that the process followed for the seizure was in accordance with the law and did not require judicial intervention. The court clarified that there were no procedural errors in this regard.

The court also addressed the conduct of the victim's lawyer during the trial. Judge Das remarked that several questions posed by the lawyer were "unrealistic and imaginary," and that they undermined the seriousness of the case. The judge further questioned whether the documents submitted by the victim’s lawyer could be considered valid written arguments, given their nature and content.

This judgment marks a significant step in the ongoing legal proceedings, rejecting the claims made by the victim's family. The court's ruling serves to clarify the handling of key aspects of the case, including the seizure of evidence and the role of the medical college's administration. As the case progresses, further investigation and legal scrutiny are expected.