'Senior WB Police Officers Competent, No Need For CBI' : Supreme Court Constitutes SIT To Probe Custodial Torture Allegations By RG Kar Protestors

The Supreme Court today constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the allegations of custodial torture of 2 women arrested amid protests that took place in West Bengal after the RG Kar Medical College rape-murder incident.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan was dealing with State of West Bengal's challenge to a Calcutta High Court order which directed CBI probe into the matter. Earlier, while issuing notice, the Court had stayed this direction of the High Court. It asked the state government to submit a list of IPS officers (including women officers), who could be included in an SIT to investigate the custodial torture case instead of CBI.

Taking into account a list of officers furnished by the state, the Court constituted an SIT today - of officers not belonging to the State of West Bengal but serving therein. It comprises:

(1) Mr. Akash Makharia, IPS, DIG Presidency Range;

(2) Ms. Swati Bhangalia, Superintendent of Police, Howrah (Rural); and

(3) Ms. Sujata Kumari Veenapani, IPS, Deputy Commissioner (Traffic), Howrah.

As per directions, the SIT shall take over the investigation forthwith and submit weekly status reports to a bench of the Calcutta High Court (to be constituted for the purpose by the High Court's Chief Justice). The SIT can seek further directions from the said bench, to take the investigation to its logical conclusion.

The SIT can also associate some other police officers, if so required, for assistance. The victims, on the other hand, would be at liberty to approach the SIT to ensure no harm is caused to their life and liberty. In this regard, the SIT "shall take necessary steps, without any delay".

Notably, while passing the order, the Court also expressed that routine transfer of investigations to CBI can have a demoralizing impact on senior state police officers.

"Routine entrustment of investigation of matters to CBI not only leads to burden on the premier investigating agency of the country, it has very serious demoralizing impact on the officers of the state police. It may not be prudent to proceed on the premise that senior officers allocated to West Bengal cadre are incompetent or inefficient to hold a fair, independent and dispassionate investigation and find out the truth."

Before parting, the Court clarified that the observations made in the impugned High Court order shall not be construed as an expression on the allegations levelled and the SIT should proceed with the investigation independent of the same.

Background

Statedly, the 2 women were participants in the Nabanna Abhijan march, held following the RG Kar Medical College incident. During this protest, they allegedly made objectionable remarks against the minor daughter of Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee.

A complaint was filed at the Diamond Harbour police station and the police booked the 2 women under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the POCSO Act and the Information Technology Act. After they were arrested, they levelled allegations of assault in custody by police officers.

Initially, a Single Bench of the High Court ordered a CBI probe into the allegations. In appeal, a Division Bench upheld the single bench's order, noting that medical reports by the correctional home indicated custodial torture.

"The fact that has greatly disturbed our mind is the discrepancy in the recording of the medical state of the petitioners by different authorities. The POCSO judge ordered for judicial custody of the accused. The medical officer of the correctional home recorded hematomas in legs and back, and pain. This recording cannot be disputed due to the documents presented. Shockingly, when the accused earlier was produced before the government medical hospital, Diamond Harbour, it was said that there was no external injury. This shows a clear discrepancy. It is evidently clear that the trauma has occurred to the writ petitioner when they were in police custody."

It was further stated that due to the nature of the incident, allowing the police to investigate the same, would lead to a conflict of interest.

Against the Division Bench's order, the State of West Bengal approached the Supreme Court.

Appearance: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal (for West Bengal); Senior Advocates Narendra Hooda and Ranjit Kumar (for respondents)

Case Title: THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. Versus REBEKA KHATUN MOLLA @ REBEKA MOLLA AND ORS., SLP(Crl) No. 15481/2024