RG KAR CASE REOPENS OLD QUESTIONS: CBI SECURES CUSTODY OF FORMER PANIHATI CIVIC CHIEF OVER ALLEGED CREMATION IRREGULARITIES
October 29, 2026
KOLKATA, OCTOBER 29, 2026 — The investigation into the rape and murder of a postgraduate trainee doctor at Kolkata’s RG Kar Medical College and Hospital has entered another significant phase, with a Sealdah court granting the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) two days of custody of former Panihati Municipality chairman Somnath De. The development concerns allegations surrounding the handling and hurried cremation of the victim’s body in August 2024, a matter that her family has repeatedly asked investigators to examine more thoroughly.
The court granted the CBI’s application on Wednesday, allowing investigators to question De about the allegations. He is scheduled to be produced before the court on Friday.
The custody order marks the first time the central agency has sought De’s custodial interrogation in connection with the family’s longstanding claims about the circumstances surrounding the cremation. It does not, however, establish that the allegations against him are true.
THE FAMILY’S QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CREMATION
The victim’s family has questioned the circumstances in which the 31-year-old doctor’s body was taken to the Panihati crematorium after she was found dead at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9, 2024.
The family has alleged that De and others exerted pressure on them and hurried the cremation, potentially preventing further examination of the body and the preservation of evidence. They have also questioned whether the family was given sufficient time to pay its final respects.
The allegations extend beyond the conduct of one former municipal official. The family has sought further investigation into the roles allegedly played by former Trinamool Congress MLA Nirmal Ghosh and former Panihati councillor Sanjib Mukherjee.
These remain allegations requiring examination against the available evidence. The purpose of the CBI’s questioning is to establish the relevant sequence of events and determine whether the evidence supports the claims made by the family.
The family’s insistence on a deeper investigation has continued despite the conviction of the person prosecuted for the original rape and murder.
WHY THE CBI WANTS TO QUESTION SOMNATH DE
The CBI, which has been investigating the RG Kar case since August 2024, sought De’s custody to question him about the alleged circumstances surrounding the cremation.
The family’s lawyer also sought custodial interrogation of Ghosh and Mukherjee during Wednesday’s court proceedings. Their request reflects the family’s continuing demand that the actions of people allegedly involved in the handling of the body be investigated.
The CBI’s investigation must distinguish between evidence relating to the original crime and evidence concerning the subsequent handling of the victim’s body. Establishing whether any person interfered with evidence, exerted unlawful pressure on the family or violated applicable procedures requires a separate assessment of the relevant acts and responsibilities.
De was arrested in Bengaluru in September in connection with a separate police case concerning alleged irregularities surrounding the cremation. The CBI’s latest custody application brings the allegations back into focus within the broader, court-monitored investigation.
A SEPARATE CASE AND A JUDICIAL WARNING
After the BJP government came to power in West Bengal in May 2026, Barrackpore police initiated a separate investigation into allegations concerning the cremation.
The decision created a jurisdictional and procedural complication because the CBI’s court-monitored investigation was already under way. The Calcutta High Court reprimanded the police for pursuing a parallel case while the central agency’s investigation remained active.
The episode illustrates the legal difficulties that can arise when multiple agencies investigate overlapping aspects of a high-profile criminal case. Separate inquiries may be warranted where distinct alleged offences or responsibilities are involved, but they must comply with judicial directions and avoid undermining an existing investigation.
The court’s intervention did not, by itself, determine the truth or falsity of the allegations concerning the cremation. It highlighted the need for investigative action to proceed within the appropriate legal framework.
The central question now is whether the evidence gathered through the CBI’s questioning and other investigative steps can establish what happened during the hours between the discovery of the victim’s body and its cremation.
THE ORIGINAL CASE AND THE LIMITS OF THE EXISTING CONVICTION
The 31-year-old postgraduate trainee was found dead inside a seminar hall in the emergency building of RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9, 2024. The crime provoked widespread public anger, protests and demands for greater protection of women in educational and medical institutions.
Kolkata Police initially arrested civic volunteer Sanjay Roy, and the investigation was subsequently transferred to the CBI. Roy was convicted and is serving a life sentence.
However, the victim’s family has continued to question whether every aspect of the case was adequately investigated. Its concerns have included the possibility of additional involvement in the crime and the circumstances surrounding the subsequent handling of the body.
The CBI has not filed a second chargesheet naming additional accused in the original rape-and-murder case, according to The Telegraph India’s report. The latest custody order concerning De should therefore not be misrepresented as proof that additional people participated in the original crime.
The allegations concerning the cremation and the question of responsibility for the rape and murder are related in the wider public debate, but they are not interchangeable. Any criminal responsibility must be established on the evidence relevant to the particular allegation.
THE DEMAND FOR ACCOUNTABILITY
For the victim’s family, the latest development represents an opportunity to obtain answers about events that they believe have not been adequately explained. Their continued pursuit of the cremation allegations reflects a broader demand that the investigation account for the entire sequence of events, rather than end with the conviction of the person prosecuted for the principal crime.
For investigators, the challenge is to establish the facts without allowing political controversy or public pressure to substitute for evidence. De’s custodial interrogation may help clarify disputed events, but its significance will ultimately depend on what the CBI discovers and how that material is assessed by the court.
The case has also become politically contentious, with allegations involving former Trinamool Congress figures and the actions of the police under different administrations. Political implications, however, cannot determine criminal liability. That requires evidence, lawful investigation and judicial scrutiny.
TWO DAYS OF QUESTIONING, A LARGER SEARCH FOR ANSWERS
The two-day custody period gives the CBI a limited window to question De about the allegations surrounding the cremation. Investigators will need to establish the sequence of events, examine the relevant records and communications, and assess the accounts of those involved.
The custody order is an investigative step, not a verdict. Whether it leads to further charges or clarifies the family’s concerns remains to be seen.
More than two years after the RG Kar crime, the case continues to raise difficult questions about institutional responsibility, the handling of evidence and public confidence in criminal investigations. The latest development may help answer some of those questions—but only a transparent, evidence-based process can establish what happened and who, if anyone, bears criminal responsibility.
The central demand remains unchanged: every credible allegation must be investigated, every conclusion must rest on evidence, and justice must be established through the law rather than assumed from accusation or political assertion.
