Kolkata: Two witnesses were examined before a city court on Tuesday (November 12) in the ongoing trial of rape and murder of a woman doctor at the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9.
Sanjay Roy, who is the prime accused in the rape and murder of the 31-year-old woman doctor, was produced before the court of additional district and sessions judge Anirban Das under heavy security of police.
Trial in the case began on Monday
The trial in the case, which is held in-camera and on a day-to-day basis, began on Monday.
Read More
Sources told news agency PTI that two witnesses in the case were examined on Tuesday and today’s examination of two witnesses took the total number of witnesses examined in the case to four and two more witnesses will be examined before the Sealdah court on Wednesday.
Trial court on November 4 framed charges against Sanjay Roy
The trial court in Sealdah court had on November 4 framed charges against prime accused Roy, who has been booked in the case under section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) Section 66 (which pertains to punishment for causing death or resulting in a persistent vegetative state) and 103 (punishment for murder).
CBI earlier filed a chargesheet against Sanjay Roy
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which is investigating the case on the orders of the Calcutta High Court, had earlier filed a chargesheet against Roy before the court relying on various oral and documentary evidence and forensic and scientific reports to establish that Roy, who was arrested by the Kolkata Police on the following day of the incident on August 10, was the sole perpetrator of rape and murder of the on-duty woman doctor at the seminar room of the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9.
Supreme Court last week refused to transfer trial outside West Bengal
The Supreme Court has taken the suo motu cognisance of the incident and is currently seized of the matter. The top court, while hearing the matter last week, refused to transfer the trial of the case outside West Bengal, saying that the trial court judge had sufficient powers to order another investigation into the matter if it felt it necessary after examining the evidence.
