The Calcutta High Court has ordered a CBI investigation into the alleged custodial torture of a woman who was arrested over the protests against the rape and murder of a doctor at the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital.

Two petitioners, both women, alleged physical abuse by the police during their detention, the court said, while noting that a report of a jail official confirmed such act on one of them.

Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj on Tuesday directed the CBI to conduct a thorough investigation into the alleged physical torture that took place during police custody of one of them from September 8 to September 11.

"The decision to transfer the matter to the CBI is based on the need for an impartial and independent inquiry into the serious allegations of custodial torture," the court observed.

Justice Bharadwaj said that given the alleged involvement of police authorities, an investigation by a local law enforcement agency might present a conflict of interest.

"The CBI is instructed to identify the police officers involved and to undertake appropriate legal proceedings against those responsible for such act in accordance with the law," the court said.

The two petitioners submitted that they participated in several peaceful rallies demanding justice in the brutal rape and murder of the doctor at the RG Kar hospital on August 9.

They maintained that their participation in these lawful demonstrations is protected under Article 19 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly.

It was stated that on September 8, the first petitioner was arrested by officers from Falta police station in South 24 Parganas district following a complaint by a woman.

It was also stated that the charges filed against her included several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, as well as provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO), 2012 and the Information Technology Act, 2000.

The court further noted that the second petitioner was arrested on August 27 while participating in the Nabanna Abhiyan rally organised by 'Chhatra Samaj'.

Although initially released on bail after being charged under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, and the West Bengal Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1972, she was rearrested on September 7.

She, too, was implicated under the same Falta police station case as the first petitioner.

Both petitioners were produced before the district and sessions judge, special court (under the POCSO Act) at Diamond Harbour, on September 9.

Their requests for bail were denied, and they were remanded to police custody, followed by judicial custody. It was stated that the petitioners were granted bail on October 5.

Advocate General Kishore Dutta, appearing for the West Bengal government, submitted that the petitioners had been lawfully arrested and detained based on credible allegations against them.

He further stated that the petitioners, contrary to their claims of participating in peaceful protests, were involved in activities that violated legal provisions.

The high court noted that upon reviewing the medical report submitted by the superintendent of the Diamond Harbour sub-correctional home, it is evident that the second petitioner was subjected to physical torture while in police custody.

The court observed that in the present case, there is no "reason to believe" that the petitioners are involved in any illegal activity, as the FIR, along with the material collected in support thereof, does not disclose any credible evidence or establish the commission of an offence.

Passing the order, Justice Bharadwaj directed the state to file an affidavit in opposition to the averments made by the petitioners in four weeks and reply to it by the petitioners in another one week.

The court directed the investigating officer of the CBI to file a report before it by November 15.

The matter will appear for hearing again on November 18, the court directed.

Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by The Telegraph Online staff and has been published from a syndicated feed.