While those advocating for the death penalty cited the crime's brutality and public interest, the court's decision for life imprisonment was also legally sound, based on India's "rarest of the rare" doctrine for capital punishment. The judge found insufficient evidence that Roy was beyond reform, a key criterion for the death penalty, which aligns with both legal standards and precedents.
Despite the court's subjective legal opinion, Roy's crime — especially given the fact that he was a trusted volunteer — was heinous and arguably indeed the rarest of rare. A state jurisdiction likely would've led to the death penalty, reflecting local demand for such punishments. While this ruling is over, doctors' protests will continue as they seek justice and question the investigation's depth.