Kolkata: Calcutta High Court has assigned the R G Kar rape-murder case to a special bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar and Justice Tirthankar Ghosh, making it the fourth bench to be assigned to hear the case.Earlier this week, on Tuesday, the division bench of justices Rajasekhar Mantha and Rai Chattopadhyay recused from the case, citing ‘heavy roster’. Justice Mantha remarked, during the hearing, on the possibility of formation of a judicial commission on the matter.The incident took place on Aug 9, 2024, when a 31-year-old PGT doctor was raped and murdered at the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital. Initially arrested by Kolkata Police, the prime suspect, Sanjay Roy, was convicted by the Sealdah court on Jan 19, 2025. Based on the CBI probe, to which Calcutta High Court handed over the case, Roy was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment.The special bench formed by Chief Justice Sujoy Paul will be hearing multiple cases linked to the incident, including the ones by parents seeking further probe, another case by Roy challenging his conviction and a case by CBI seeking the death sentence for Roy.Before this, two other benches — the single bench of Justice Tirthankar Ghosh and the division bench of justices Debangsu Basak and Md Shabbar Rashidi — had released the matter from their list.Aggrieved by the way the probe was conducted, the parents moved Justice Ghosh’s bench, which on Aug 28, 2025, recused from hearing the case, stating that the other two petitions challenging Roy’s punishment were pending before the division bench of Justice Debangsu Basak.The division bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md Shabbar Rashidi released the case on March 11, 2026. The bench stated that one of the litigants has written to CJ seeking an expeditious hearing. “Since, we are no longer the regular appeal court hearing criminal appeals and considering the number of matters pending in our regular determination, we are not in a position to accord the requisite priority to the hearing of these matters as desired by one of the litigants. Significantly, the matters were adjourned at least once on the ground of the Senior Advocate of such litigant,” the bench observed when releasing the case.
