What Kapil Sibal told Supreme Court as time of RG Kar victim’s post-mortem doesn’t match with report

Mismatch in the timeline of events as narrated by the rape & murder victim’s family and the authorities has been a feature of the case that has shocked Calcutta and India

A photograph of the post mortem report of the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital rape-murder case with the timing highlighted.: Sourced by the correspondent

Arnab Ganguly, TT,  Calcutta, 21.08.24 :  Facing a volley of questions from Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice Jamshed B. Pardiwala, senior advocate Kapil Sibal in front of the three-judge bench of the Supreme Court categorically stated on Tuesday that the autopsy and the post-mortem of the body of the RG Kar rape and murder victim was held between 1 pm and 4.45 pm on August 9.

Sibal’s comment made before the apex court does not match with the post-mortem report, which mentions the time of post-mortem examination as 6.10 pm to 7. 10 pm.

The Telegraph Online has seen a copy of the post-mortem report, which is signed with seal by two doctors who are part of the forensic department at RG Kar and co-signed by an assistant professor without seal.

The post-mortem examination was conducted at the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9 under the Tala Police Station, with UD (unnatural death) case no. 861 and Tala police station inquest no. 1139/24.

The report – post-mortem number 1584 – states that the body was brought at 6 pm and the post-mortem examination was conducted between 6.10 pm and 7.10 pm.

The inquest report – a copy of which The Telegraph Online has seen – states that the inquest had started at 4.20 pm in front of two witnesses and the victim’s mother was also present.

The times mentioned on the post-mortem report and the inquest report contradict the timeline the authorities have presented in public so far.

The times mentioned in the reports seem to corroborate the victim’s parents’ version of the timeline of events on that fateful day.

The parents have maintained that they were not allowed to see their daughter’s body for hours. The authorities, including the lawyers representing the state in the suo motu case in the apex court, have denied that.

During Tuesday’s hearing Justice Pardiwala had raised the questions on when the FIR was lodged.

“Who is the first informant? We were talking about the first information report. Who is that first informant?” Justice Pardiwala had asked. “Can you name us, please?”

“Name him?” Sibal asked the judges.

“Who is the first informant who lodged the FIR,” Justice Pardiwala clarified.

“I will find out,” Sibal said.

“And we would also like to know the time of the registration of the FIR.” Justice Pardiwala continued.

“The father of the victim, milord,” informed Sibal, who had half-turned towards one of his assistants. “The first UD case was done by the police on its own.”

“That is not an FIR,” observed Justice Pardiwala. “What is the Section 174 of the old CrPC today? Can anyone assist us please? That’s just the report”

“To start the investigation…” Sibal interjected.

“Then who lodged the FIR?” Justice Pardiwala asked again.

“First the father of the deceased, then the vice-principal of the college,” informed Sibal.

Observing that there can’t be two FIRs, Justice Pardiwala asked about the time of the filing of the FIR.

“II.45 pm,” replied Sibal.

After some discussion between themselves, the CJI DY Chandrachud asked at what time the body was handed over to the family.

The court was given three different times at first: 3.30 pm, 3.10 pm and 8.30 pm.

“One thing is clear; the body was handed over to the family for cremation at 8.30 pm and the FIR is registered at 11.45 pm, three hours and 15 minutes after the body is handed over for cremation,” said the CJI.

“They refused to… milord, this is the problem. We handed it over, they filed the FIR, they made the complaint at 11.45. They said we are in shock please do whatever you want to do. They wanted a post mortem, we did the post mortem. All is videographed. Everything is videographed,” Sibal said.

“When did the autopsy and post mortem take place,” asked the CJI.

“Between 1.45 and 4pm,” Sibal is categorically heard in the video telling the court after 34.51 minutes into the hearing.

The court took cognisance of Sibal’s “hypothesis” on the timing of the post mortem.