The “Abhaya” Verdict–A Great Sweet Fanny Adams?

Jayanta Bhattacharya

By now, everyone knows about the verdict of  “Abhaya” rape, torture and murder case (and the great tide of movement following it and lasting for more than two months across India and the world). Sanjay Roy–a civic volunteer of the low-income group–has been adjudicated as the single guilty (?) and awarded imprisonment until death in prison. Who could be the best culprit other than him–away from the power centre, without economic resources and belonging to lower rung of civil society? Though it might remind people about Dhananjay Bhattacharya’s hanging in 2004.

Abhaya murder had ignited so much sensation in Bengal in particular, and across India and the more than 60 big cities across the world in general that the newspapers like the New York Times published at least three consecutive articles– “Medic’s Killing Fuels Protests and Walkouts in India” (August 15, 2024), “Worked to the Bone, India’s Doctors Fear for Their Safety, Too’ (Sept. 1, 2024) and “In India, Some Doctors Go on Hunger Strike to Protest Killing of Colleague” (Oct. 17, 2024).

The celebrated medical journal Lancet too published a report titled “A crisis of safety: female health-care workers in India need reforms” (Sept. 14, 024). The report observed, “The tragic rape and murder of a trainee doctor at the R G Kar Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata, has once again highlighted the urgent need to address the safety of female health-care workers in India, particularly in government hospitals. This incident is not isolated, but part of a broader pattern of violence against women in health-care settings that demands immediate attention and action.” It further added, “To address this critical issue, we urge that these actions are taken: first, mandatory CCTV surveillance in all areas of government hospitals, including operating theatres and on-call rooms; second, standardised protocols and comprehensive training for all hospital staff on recognising and responding to violence against women; third, establishing hospital-based crisis centres for women across India, expanding successful models similar to Dilaasa (a hospital based crisis centre, was set up in order to provide the much needed psychosocial support to women reporting domestic violence); fourth, stricter laws and enforcement to prosecute perpetrators of violence against health-care workers; fifth, improved infrastructure such as secure staff housing, transportation, and well lit hospital premises; sixth, regular safety audits of hospital facilities and anonymous reporting systems for staff to raise concerns; and seventh, increased representation of women in hospital leadership and safety committees.”

Earlier, on August 24, 2024, the Lancet published another article titled “Rape and murder of doctor sparks outrage in India” where it was clearly stated that “As many as 25 states have laws covering attacks on doctors but there have been very few convictions ... Nearly half of young doctors experienced violence at work in the past 6 months, with 61·5% reporting violence during night shifts. More than half of the doctors who faced violence said there was no violence prevention policy in their hospitals ... The murder of this young lady is not the first neither it would be the last if corrective measures are not taken.”

Flawed Investigation
The Telegraph (23.01.2025) has published a front page article “R G Kar manual on what not to do”) highlighting the important judgement given by the additional district and sessions judge of Sealdah court (the trial court). It has raised serious questions about the whole investigation process which can be outlined as follows–(1) general diary after the death is grossly flawed (elaborately outlined in the verdict), (2) “Blaœe about mistake” (details have been provided in the Telegraph article), (3) “Phone left unattended”, (4) “A lie”–the judge mentioned that an assistant superintendent (non-medical) of RG Kar had informed the parents of the victim that she committed suicide, (5) “Last seen alive” (mentioning conflicting statements), (5) “Cause of death” (the judge clearly mentioned that the death of the victim was due to the effects of manual strangulation associated with smothering and the manner of death was homicidal), (6) “Time of death”, (7) “Sexual assault” (confirmed regarding insertion into the vagina), (8) “One or more assailants” (according to the judge, from the nature of the injuries, it was apparent that more than one person was involved) (9) “Who committed crime”, (10) “The crime scene” (according to the judgement, the seminar room was not the scene of crime or the place of occurrence), and, finally, (11) “Motive” (the offence committed by him (Sanjay Roy) was not pre-planned).

West Bengal Junior Doctors’ Front (WBJDF) has also pointed the serious fallacies in the investigation process conducted by the CBI. They have charted out 20 points of grave concern and distributed leaflets containing these points amongst the huge crowd gathering outside Sealdah court. Some of the most important questions raised by them are–(1) why the parents not allow their daughter’s body instantly and why they were almost detained for three hours? Is it humane? Is it even legal? (2) Why did not the college administration lodge FIR on their behalf? What is the mystery behind it? (3) in the nails of Sanjay Roy, no DNA of the victim's body has been found, (4) so many persons were seen in the CCTV footage, but no one has been interrogated, (5) why only the swab from the nipples was taken and why not any other important swabs taken? (6) a female’s DNA has been found from the victim’s body raising the serious question about the identity of a mysterious lady and, moreover, why this “puzzling” lady was not identified and interrogated by CBI.

The Movement is Far Reaching
Despite all these lacunae and loopholes in the investigation (most likely deliberately), the movement has stirred citizens of West Bengal and a section of so-called “elites” hibernating so far. The movement has achieved a number of historical milestones for future generations, sociologists, political analysts, thinking people and so on.

First, the movement was without any political banner and was not under the control of any political party. In that sense, the movement was initiated by junior doctors en masse, later the movement was fully successful in bringing into its fold senior doctors of almost all organizations and, especially, common people across Bengal society.

Second, the “Reclaim the Night” movement by women of all walks of society on 14 August 2024 opened up the very important “third space” existing beyond political parties and government/state dominance. Women of all strata of our society had gained their own voice beyond patriarchal control.

Third, the way junior doctors have carried forward their arguments has led to an impressive, accomplished, logical, rational, gentlemanly yet quite firm core argumentative framework. It may be contrasted with the barbarous, vulgar, obscene, illogical, harsh diatribes used by political parties and leaders, especially holding the rein of power. Moreover, their diatribes are always invariably oriented towards personal attacks, which the WBJDF never did.

Fourth, the movement has completely unearthed and laid bare the so far invisible and indiscernible ghastly nexus of crime, fraudulence, threat culture, deeply corrupted medicine-drug-industry-state complex of the hidden “medical empire” which was operating for decades. It has asked the pinnacle of power– “Hello, the king, where is your cloth?”

Fifth, they have raised and clinched the issue central referral system and the number vacant beds to be displayed electronically at every hospital–be\ it medical college hospitals, tertiary centres or secondary centres. They have spoken volubly for people’s health and shouted for a patient-cantered medical system, snatching it out of lackadaisical, inhumane and red-tape dependent bureaucratic power-centred procedures.

Whither the Movement?
Right now the movement’s outcome is fully dependent on judicial process. But it has possibly unravelled the vicious nexus between CBI, state police, state and central machinery and also, maybe, a miniscule of the judicial system. Importantly, Alladi Krishnaswamy Ayyar, an eminent Tamil lawyer and a member of the Constituent Assembly to frame the Constitution, clearly uttered on 8 November 1948, “judicial legislation, so to speak, to read the necessary limitations, according to [the] idiosyncrasies and prejudices ... of individual judges.” (John Harris, Liberty: The Indian Story, 2024, p. 96)

The people of India will certainly be free from such “idiosyncrasies and prejudices”.

Finally, the judicial process is not yet over. CBI is supposed to place supplementary charge sheet(s). Moreover, Abhaya’s family has approached the Supreme Court (with 54 points of various irregularities, inconsistencies and lapses in the CBI charge sheet) for further investigation. The harrowing months have produced angst, agony, torment and tragedy amongst the parents of the murdered and raped daughter as well as among her fellow comrades. Is it too ambitious to expect a reflection of all these in the supplementary charge sheet(s)?

Back to Home Page

Frontier
Vol 57, No. 33, Feb 9 - 15, 2025