A) Abstract / Headnote

This landmark judgment arose from a suo motu cognizance by the Supreme Court concerning the brutal rape and murder of a trainee doctor at R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata. The case highlighted systemic deficiencies in institutional safety for medical professionals. The Court addressed gender-specific violence, general workplace safety, and structural inefficiencies in healthcare institutions. Directions were issued to establish a National Task Force (NTF) to examine and resolve workplace safety for medical professionals. The investigation into the crime was transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), and the State of West Bengal was directed to address institutional failures and violence. The judgment emphasized the necessity of safe working conditions, aligning it with the constitutional mandate for equality and safety.

Keywords: R.G. Kar Hospital, Medical Professional Safety, Sexual Violence, National Task Force, Institutional Safety Standards.

B) Case Details

i) Judgement Cause Title: In Re: Alleged Rape and Murder Incident of a Trainee Doctor in R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata

ii) Case Number: SMW (Criminal) No. 2 of 2024

iii) Judgment Date: August 20, 2024

iv) Court: Supreme Court of India

v) Quorum: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud (CJI), J.B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, JJ.

vi) Author: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI

vii) Citation: [2024] 8 S.C.R. 1047 : 2024 INSC 613

viii) Legal Provisions Involved:

• Article 32, Constitution of India
• Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013
• State-level Medicare Service Acts (Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala, Telangana, etc.)

ix) Judgments Overruled: None

x) Case is Related to: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Public Health Law, and Workplace Safety.

C) Introduction and Background

The case stemmed from a shocking incident of rape and murder of a postgraduate trainee doctor inside a seminar room at R.G. Kar Medical College on August 9, 2024. Nationwide protests and debates ensued, focusing on the lack of institutional safety measures for healthcare professionals. The Supreme Court took cognizance of systemic deficiencies in healthcare settings, emphasizing gender-based vulnerabilities, infrastructural deficits, and lack of security protocols.

D) Facts of the Case

1. The victim, a 31-year-old postgraduate medical trainee, was murdered and allegedly raped while on a 36-hour duty shift. The crime occurred within hospital premises, exposing severe lapses in security.
2. The victim’s parents were initially misinformed about her death being a suicide. Registration of the First Information Report (FIR) and access to her body were delayed.
3. Protests erupted nationwide under campaigns like “Reclaim the Night”, highlighting the unsafe conditions for women medical professionals.
4. The incident triggered vandalism at the hospital premises, with subsequent nationwide protests led by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) demanding systemic changes.
5. The Calcutta High Court transferred the investigation to the CBI, citing the necessity for impartial inquiry into institutional culpability.

E) Legal Issues Raised

1. Was the lack of institutional safety norms responsible for the victim’s death?
2. Did existing legislation and policies adequately address workplace safety and gender-based violence in healthcare?
3. What reforms are necessary to ensure safety and dignity for medical professionals?

F) Petitioner/Appellant’s Arguments

• The Court initiated suo motu proceedings emphasizing systemic lapses rather than individual blame.
• The lack of secure duty rooms, inadequate sanitation, and insufficient security were underscored as contributing factors.
• Counsel argued the need for national guidelines and highlighted specific vulnerabilities faced by female healthcare workers.

G) Respondent’s Arguments

• The State of West Bengal cited efforts to maintain law and order post-incident, including administrative measures to handle protests and vandalism.
• It justified initial procedural lapses due to the sensitivity and complexity of the case.
• The Union Government emphasized existing legislation, like the Sexual Harassment Act and state-specific Medicare Acts, as adequate frameworks requiring stricter implementation.

H) Related Legal Provisions

1. Article 32, Constitution of India: Ensures judicial remedy for rights violations.
2. Sexual Harassment Act, 2013: Mandates Internal Complaints Committees and protective measures for women in workplaces, including hospitals.
3. State Medicare Protection Acts: Prohibit violence against healthcare personnel but lack comprehensive institutional safety mechanisms.

I) Judgment

a. Ratio Decidendi
The Court held that systemic failures, gender biases, and institutional apathy contributed significantly to the incident. It emphasized that safe working conditions are a constitutional imperative tied to equality and dignity.

b. Obiter Dicta
The judgment commented on broader societal attitudes and called for introspection on patriarchal biases in professional spaces, particularly in healthcare.

c. Guidelines The Court issued extensive directions:

1. Formation of National Task Force (NTF): A nine-member body to develop actionable safety protocols.
2. Enhancement of Security Measures: Compulsory CCTV installations, restricted access areas, and 24×7 security personnel in all hospitals.
3. Improvement of Duty Conditions: Provision of gender-segregated resting spaces, adequate lighting, and 24-hour transport services.
4. Monitoring and Accountability: Creation of “Employee Safety Committees” in hospitals to ensure compliance.
5. Sensitization and Training: Conducting workshops on handling grief and violence for medical staff.
6. Government Coordination: Central and State Governments to furnish data on existing facilities and institutional measures.

J) References

a. Important Cases Referred

• Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011 (on sexual harassment standards).
• Aruna Shanbaug Case, (2011) 4 SCC 454 (institutional accountability).

b. Important Statutes Referred

• Sexual Harassment Act, 2013
• State-level Medicare Service Acts (Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala, Telangana, West Bengal).