Legal experts have voiced support for a life sentence instead of the death penalty in the RG Kar case. Former West Bengal Advocate General Jayanta Mitra stated his strong opposition to capital punishment, citing ethical and philosophical reasons. He emphasized his belief in justice over retribution, rejecting the idea of “an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth.” The debate continues as public opinion remains divided on the issue.
Amid the ongoing debate regarding the Kolkata court’s sentencing of Sanjay Roy to life imprisonment for the rape and murder of a medic at R G Kar Medical College and Hospital, legal experts are firmly opposed to the death penalty.
On January 20, the Sealdah sessions court found Roy guilty and sentenced him to life imprisonment until the end of his natural life. Former Supreme Court judge Ashok Ganguly criticized the death penalty as “undemocratic and irreversible,” asserting that such punishment should not exist in a free, democratic society.
He argued that the call for capital punishment in Roy’s case is unjust, noting that over 150 countries have abolished it. In Europe, no country permits the death penalty, and many U.S. states also refrain from it.
Ganguly told,
“We often demand the death penalty because we see it as an easy solution,”
He pointed to the Nirbhaya case, where four individuals received the death penalty, yet incidents of rape and murder have continued to rise, demonstrating that capital punishment has failed as a deterrent. Ganguly stated that the sessions court was correct in not awarding the death penalty, especially since the investigation is incomplete.
The Sealdah court judge emphasized that the crime does not meet the stringent criteria for being classified as “rarest of the rare,” urging society to move beyond the primitive instinct of retribution. “In the realm of modern justice, we must rise above the fundamental instinct of ‘an eye for an eye’,” observed Anirban Das, Additional District and Sessions Judge.
Senior advocate and parliamentarian Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya called for the abolition of capital punishment, labeling it “barbarous and uncivilized” in a democratic society. He stated that if capital punishment were to exist, it should only be awarded by the Supreme Court in extraordinary cases.
Former West Bengal Advocate General Jayanta Mitra expressed his opposition to capital punishment, noting that the case had many unresolved aspects.
He remarked,
“I am glad that capital punishment was not awarded, because there are a lot of things that will come out in the future. This man has to live to tell the story.”
Ganguly also highlighted that a supplementary chargesheet from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is still pending and that unless the investigation is complete, capital punishment cannot be justly imposed. He reiterated that simply because the crime is heinous does not warrant the death penalty, emphasizing that the nature of the crime and the criminal’s background must be carefully considered.
Adding that the CBI has not established that Roy poses such a threat, he said,
“The state must prove, through evidence, that the accused is a menace to society and incapable of reform,”