… And how many ears must one man have

Before he can hear people cry?

Advertisement

Yes, and how many deaths will it take ’til he knows

That too many people have died?

             — Bob Dylan, Blowin’ in the Wind

Every 16 minutes, a woman is raped somewhere in India. From what data the National Crime Records Bureau reveals, in 96.8 per cent cases, the accused is known to the victim. Regardless of whether she is an innocent infant or an elderly woman in the twilight of her years, the cruel reality remains that victims of assault know no age constraints. Yet, despite the unequivocal nature of such atrocities, the relentless tide of victim shaming persists unabated. The accusatory barrage of questions— “What was she wearing?” “Why was she alone?” “Why was she outside at night?”—serves only to shift the burden of guilt from the perpetrator to the victim, perpetuating a culture of blame that is as insidious as the crime itself. This systemic failure to protect and honour the dignity of all individuals, irrespective of their circumstances, underscores a profound societal malaise that demands urgent redress.

The horrifying and mortifying details surrounding the rape and murder of a young trainee doctor (call her Abhaya or Tilottama, if you may) on 9 August this year at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata have reverberated across the nation, plunging the collective conscience of society into a state of acute dismay. This barbaric act, perpetrated within the very walls of an institution dedicated to healing and care, has not only shattered the sanctity of a place meant to safeguard lives but has also cast a dark shadow over the moral fabric of our society. The sheer brutality of the incident has forced us to confront unsettling questions about the direction in which humanity is heading. The violation of a woman’s dignity and safety, in a space where she should have been protected, is a stark reminder of the systemic failures that allow such atrocities to occur.

Hearing the suo motu case, the Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra focused on three key issues: the significant delay between the discovery of the body and the lodging of the First Information Report, the classification of the death as unnatural despite the postmortem examination and the sealing of the crime scene more than 12 hours after the incident. The Judges suggested that these factors collectively contributed to the perception of a severely flawed investigation.

“Medical professions have become vulnerable to violence….due to ingrained patriarchal biases, the women doctors are targeted more,” CJI Chandrachud noted, adding, “As more and more women join the workforce…..the nation cannot wait for another rape for things to change on the ground. Existing enactments do not adequately address the institutional safety standards for doctors and medical workers.”

The Supreme Court issued directives to prevent the dissemination of the victim’s identity and photographs on social media. Additionally, the Court mandated enhanced security measures at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital and called for the establishment of a task force to investigate incidents.

The CJI also debunked the arguments circulating on social media related to the presence of 151 mg of semen in the body of the 31-year-old trainee doctor.

However, this is not the sole instance of misinformation proliferating on social media. Mysteriously, and without any credible basis, the names and photographs of several trainee doctors and interns have surfaced, with online speculators alleging their direct involvement in the crime. Speaking to The Statesman, Dr Shreya Shaw of RG Kar Medical College and Hospital stated, “We are completely at a loss as to why these individuals have been unfairly targeted and accused of such a heinous offence. The determination of their involvement, if any, is a matter for the ongoing CBI investigation. We categorically refuse to engage in speculation and urge the public to refrain from unjustly maligning our doctors.” Another doctor, who wished to remain anonymous, added, “While a few were indeed on duty that night, to brand them as offenders solely on that basis is not only irrational but deeply unjust.”

Meanwhile, the primary accused in the crime, Sanjay Roy, has been remanded to judicial custody until 6 September as of Friday. Roy, a civic police volunteer, was apprehended by the Kolkata Police on 10 August, one day following the commission of the crime. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has obtained judicial approval from the court to administer a polygraph test on Roy.

Furthermore, in response to a petition submitted by whistleblower Akhtar Ali, former deputy medical superintendent at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital, Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj of the Calcutta High Court has ordered that a court-monitored probe by the CBI be conducted into the alleged financial irregularities at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital during the tenure of former principal Sandip Ghosh.

The grim reality that women are not safe anywhere—be it in the ostensibly secure confines of their homes, the professional sanctity of their workplaces, or the public spaces they traverse—stands as a stark indictment of our society. The mere act of existing as a woman has become fraught with peril, as threats to their safety are omnipresent and indiscriminate. In their homes, where they should find refuge, women are too often subjected to the horrors of domestic violence, their autonomy and well-being compromised by those who should be their protectors. In workplaces, the promise of professional fulfilment is marred by the pervasive spectre of harassment, where power dynamics are exploited to undermine their dignity and career aspirations. The Supreme Court, though, has established the Vishaka Guidelines to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace, only a few cases are actually reported. The Vishaka guidelines served as the basis for the enactment of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013. Even in public spaces, where the freedom to move and interact is a fundamental right, women are met with the constant threat of violence and objectification. This pervasive insecurity, rooted in deeply entrenched patriarchal norms, highlights a grievous failure to safeguard the fundamental rights and freedoms that should be afforded to all individuals, regardless of gender.

But, that is not all. A recent report revealed that the internet has been trawled in search of ‘videos’ of the grave offence that took place on the fateful night of 9 August. This twisted ‘curiosity’, where some derive perverse satisfaction from witnessing acts of violence and exploitation, highlights an abject moral corruption. It is imperative to recognise that this voyeuristic predilection not only reflects but also reinforces deeply entrenched patriarchal norms that commodify and objectify women’s suffering.

When the entire country and even a few cities abroad in the UK and the USA took to the streets on 14 August with the “Women, Reclaim the Night” movement, the visibility of women at odd hours showed an act of resistance, a refusal to let fear dictate where women can or cannot be. The movement challenged the status quo and called for a legal and cultural reassessment of how women’s safety and freedom are addressed in society. Historically, the “Reclaim the Night” movement originated in Leeds in 1977 as a pivotal component of the Women’s Liberation Movement. Throughout England, marches advocating for women’s right to freely traverse public spaces after dark continued until the 1990s. The first “Reclaim the Night” protests occurred in Leeds on 12 November 1977. These demonstrations were partly a reaction to the Yorkshire Ripper murders and the subsequent police advisories instructing women to avoid public areas after dark. Participants carried placards bearing slogans such as “No Curfew on Women – Curfew on Men”. By occupying these spaces, women tried reclaiming their right to exist freely and without intimidation, asserting that the world is as much theirs in the darkness as it is in the light.