RG Kar verdict judge: 'Must rise above primitive instinct of an eye for an eye'

NEW DELHI: A Kolkata court sentenced Sanjay Roy to life imprisonment till death for the rape and murder of an on-duty doctor at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital, rejecting the prosecution's plea for the death penalty. The court held that the case does not meet the "rarest of the rare" criteria necessary for capital punishment.

Additional district and sessions judge Anirban Das of the Sealdah court stated, “In the realm of modern justice, we must rise above the primitive instinct of ‘an eye for an eye’ or ‘a life for a life.’ Our duty is not to match brutality with brutality but to elevate humanity through wisdom, compassion, and a deeper understanding of justice.”

The judge emphasised that a civilized society is measured by its capacity to reform, rehabilitate, and heal rather than exact revenge. He pointed out that the Supreme Court has consistently underscored that the death penalty should be reserved for cases where the community's collective conscience is profoundly shocked.

“Given these considerations, it would be inappropriate to accede to the prosecution’s request for the death penalty,” the judgment stated.

The court acknowledged the grief and suffering of the victim’s family, noting that no sentence could truly alleviate their loss. However, it stressed the importance of a sentence that is proportionate and in line with established legal principles.

Roy was sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment and fined ₹50,000 each on two counts—rape and murder—with the sentences to run concurrently. He was also sentenced to life imprisonment for causing injuries during the act of rape that resulted in the victim's death.

The judgment highlighted the forensic evidence as a cornerstone of the prosecution’s case. “The convergence of forensic findings, the physical evidence of sexual assault, and DNA matches from various samples construct a compelling scientific narrative that confirms the presence of the accused at the crime scene and directly links him to the violent acts,” the court noted.

It further observed, “The crime was particularly heinous, marked by brutality and the vulnerability of the victim. The act of manual strangulation coupled with smothering indicates a prolonged and deliberate infliction of suffering, compounded by sexual assault, reflecting a complete disregard for human dignity and life.”

The victim’s parents, along with sections of the medical community and civil society organizations, expressed dissatisfaction with the verdict and announced plans to appeal to a higher court.