123 Multiple allegations and theories related to the rape-murder of the PGT doctor came up during the RG Kar trial. Judge Anirban Das, in his 172-page judgment, cited those and tried to debunk them with reasons.
Theory 1: The victim was gang-raped
Rape was committed by only one person and there was no evidence of gang rape. From the autopsy report as well as during the cross-examination, it appeared that there were no fractures in the body of the victim. This evidence suggests that the assault was done by a single person. The victim's family and the defence argued that the prosecution failed to clarify the details of the white thick viscid liquid inside the endocervical canal, which was found on examination of internal genitalia. Experts opined that the weight of internal genitalia, more precisely the uterus and ovary, was noted as 151 gm, and the specific portion of the video footage was also shown during the evidence. The nature of the said liquid was not ascertained, but it was determined that it was not semen
Theory 2: A woman was hiding behind the curtains
As per the exhibits, the profile of another female chromosome was found in the anal swab, nipple swab and vulvar mop. The victim's parents argued that some other female was involved and there was a need for re-investigation. In the post-mortem video, it was found that other female dead bodies were lying on the floor. The tray where the post-mortem of this victim was done was not sterilised prior to the examination. The assistant (Dom) did not change the gloves or dress/apron prior to taking the swab or vulvar mop. It is also clear from the video that the knives/scissors were not sterilised. This is not ideal, but the doctors who conducted the post-mortem had no other option but to do their duty in such poor infrastructure. The nipple swab contains the full DNA profile of the accused as well as of the victim and a very negligible profile of another female. It means that the accused was in contact with the body of the victim. This is further corroborated by blood reports and hair samples of Sanjay Roy seized on the victim's body at the crime scene. The CCTV footage, the version of the accused during his examination u/s 351 BNSS, the contradictory defence pleas without any evidence, and the DNA examination reports point that only the accused was behind the rape and murder of the victim, and the involvement of any other person can easily be ruled out.
Theory 3: Was impossible for Sanjay Roy to throttle, smother the victim alone
The autopsy indicated death was due to the effects of manual strangulation associated with smothering, and the manner of death was homicidal. The autopsy team wanted to mean that the prime cause of death was throttling (manual strangulation), but smothering was also done. They never opined that smothering and throttling took place at the same time. The cause of death was obviously due to manual strangulation (throttling) associated with smothering.
Theory 4: Seminar room did not show any sign of struggle
The mobile, laptop, and exercise book of the victim were lying at the right side of the head of the victim. It is a fact that the same were in an undisturbed condition. This is because those were on a flat surface. But the water bottle found in the said picture was lying on the dais. It is also found that one red blanket was kept in a properly folded manner at the head of the victim. The folded red blanket was used as the pillow. On scanning the evidence on record in the light of the relevant exhibits, I have no confusion in my mind to hold that the seminar room, more particularly the dais, again more precisely the mattress on the dais, and finally the body of the victim was the scene of the crime.
Theory 5: If nursing station was manned, why didn't anyone notice anything amiss?
In the wee hours of Aug 9, when Sanjay Roy entered the chest department, it was not the time of joining any duties. It is very hard to take into consideration such an imaginary argument.
Theory 6: Roy was tortured into confession
It was also not placed anywhere during the cross-examination that the accused was beaten while he was in police custody. From the case record, I did not find anything that such an allegation was ever placed before the Ld. ACJM Sealdah during the investigation process. Accordingly, there is enough scope to hold that such defence was prepared by the accused after hearing the evidence of the witnesses and that the same had no basis at all.