Kumar Bahukhandi
Former RG Kar Medical College and Hospital principal Sandip Ghosh is seen accompanied by security personnel in Kolkata. On Thursday, October 15, 2026, the Supreme Court granted him bail in a case involving alleged financial irregularities at the hospital, prompting the father of the doctor raped and murdered there in August 2024 to question the CBI’s handling of the investigation and demand accountability.Photo: (File Image )
Family of Doctor Raped and Murdered at Kolkata Hospital Expresses Deep Disappointment, Demands Accountability from Investigating Agency and Speedy Trial in Fast-Track Court
Key Highlights
- Supreme Court grants bail to former RG Kar Medical College principal Sandip Ghosh in a case involving alleged financial irregularities.
- Father of the doctor raped and murdered at the hospital questions the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) following the bail order.
- Victim’s family expresses deep disappointment and demands accountability from the investigating agency.
- Family calls for expeditious completion of proceedings through a fast-track court.
- Ghosh was arrested amid nationwide outrage over the rape and murder of a trainee doctor on August 9, 2024.
- Bail in the financial irregularities case does not amount to acquittal or establish innocence in that case.
Kolkata: The father of the doctor raped and murdered at Kolkata’s RG Kar Medical College and Hospital has questioned the functioning of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) following the Supreme Court’s decision to grant bail to the institution’s former principal, Sandip Ghosh, in a case concerning alleged financial irregularities. Expressing deep disappointment over the development on Saturday, October 17, 2026, the victim’s father called for accountability from the investigating agency and urged that the judicial proceedings be completed expeditiously in a fast-track court.
The Supreme Court granted bail to Ghosh on Thursday, October 15, in the financial irregularities case linked to the government-run hospital.
The development has once again brought public attention to the institutional controversies surrounding RG Kar Medical College and Hospital, which became the centre of nationwide protests following the rape and murder of a young doctor in August 2024.
For the victim’s family, the bail order has revived concerns about the progress of investigations and the broader pursuit of accountability.
Victim’s Father Demands Accountability from CBI
Reacting to the Supreme Court’s order, the victim’s father questioned the role of the CBI and said the agency should be held accountable for its actions.
His response reflected the family’s continuing frustration over the legal proceedings that followed the crime.
The father described the bail order as deeply disappointing and stressed the need for the trial to be completed without unnecessary delay.
The demand for a fast-track trial reflects the family’s desire for timely judicial resolution and accountability.
However, the Supreme Court’s decision to grant bail in the financial irregularities case must be distinguished from the separate criminal proceedings arising from the doctor’s rape and murder.
Supreme Court Grants Bail in Financial Irregularities Case
The Supreme Court’s Thursday order concerned allegations of financial misconduct at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital during Ghosh’s tenure as principal.
Ghosh was arrested as scrutiny of the hospital intensified following the August 2024 crime.
The financial irregularities investigation and the rape-and-murder case involve distinct legal allegations and must not be treated as interchangeable.
Bail is a judicial decision concerning an accused person’s custody during legal proceedings. It does not, by itself, resolve the allegations or amount to an acquittal.
The precise conditions attached to Ghosh’s bail and the Court’s detailed reasoning would need to be examined from the judicial order.
Supreme Court Cites Prolonged Custody and Slow Trial
A bench comprising Justices M. M. Sundresh and P. B. Varale granted Ghosh bail after considering that he had spent more than two years in custody while only seven of the prosecution’s 147 witnesses had been examined.
The Court set aside the Calcutta High Court’s February 23, 2026, order rejecting his bail application and directed that the trial court determine the conditions of his release.
The allegations in the financial irregularities case include criminal conspiracy, breach of trust, cheating, forgery and offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Ghosh has not been acquitted of these charges.
Doctors Criticise Delays, Demand Fast-Track Proceedings
Doctors associated with the movement seeking justice for the murdered physician also criticised the pace of the proceedings.
Dr Utpal Bandyopadhyay demanded that the CBI publicly explain the delay and called for the trial to be completed in a fast-track court.
Dr Aniket Mahato questioned why only seven witnesses had been examined in more than two years, alleging that prolonged proceedings had weakened the prosecution’s case.
The victim’s father also questioned how the public could maintain confidence in an investigating agency if serious shortcomings persisted. He indicated that the family’s struggle for justice would continue.
Earlier Bail in Separate Case Adds to Family’s Frustration
Ghosh had previously secured bail from a Sealdah court in December 2024 in proceedings connected with the rape-and-murder investigation after the CBI failed to file a chargesheet against him within the prescribed 90-day period.
He nevertheless remained in custody because of the separate financial irregularities case.
The Supreme Court’s latest order concerns that financial case, not a finding on who committed the rape and murder.
Justice Delayed Remains the Central Concern
The latest developments highlight two important legal principles: an accused person’s constitutional right to a timely trial and the responsibility of investigating agencies to pursue serious allegations diligently.
For the victim’s family and the doctors who participated in the justice movement, the central concern remains whether investigations and judicial proceedings are advancing quickly enough to establish accountability.
The Supreme Court’s bail decision does not determine the truth of the allegations against Ghosh. Those questions remain for the appropriate courts to decide on the evidence.
