Law Intellect India

SC snubs HC, stands by harassed ex-judge

The Supreme Court scrapped an inquiry committee set up by the Madhya Pradesh high court chief justice to probe the sexual harassment complaint filed by a former woman additional district judge posted in Gwalior.
The Supreme Court scrapped an inquiry committee set up by the Madhya Pradesh high court chief justice to probe the sexual harassment complaint filed by a former woman additional district judge posted in Gwalior.

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday scrapped an inquiry committee set up by the Madhya Pradesh high court chief justice to probe the sexual harassment complaint filed by a former woman additional district judge posted in Gwalior.
Observing that the HC chief justice didn’t have the “authority” to set up the panel, the apex court ruled that he shouldn’t have any further role in this case and only the Chief Justice of India may re-initiate the investigative process.

The former judge complained of sexual harassment after resigning in July this year, alleging that she had been victimized with a transfer to a remote town as she refused to accede to the ‘sexually-tainted’ requests of a sitting high court judge.

After her complaint was forwarded by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) to the high court, the MP chief justice set up a two-judge inquiry committee. Later, the complainant moved the apex court challenging the jurisdiction of the HC committee. TOI was first to report about her complaint to the CJI on August 4.
A bench of Justices J S Khehar and Arun Mishra held in her favour on Thursday and said the MP chief justice had a limited authority to determine “whether or not a deeper probe is required” on the complaint and submit such a finding to the CJI for further action, if needed.

Referring to the in-house procedure devised by the Supreme Court to deal with complaints against judges of the SC and high courts, the bench said: “The chief justice of the HC, in the present case, travelled beyond the determinative authority vested in him by constituting a 2-judge committee for an in-depth probe, which vested only with the authority of Chief Justice of India.”

Writing the judgment for the bench, Justice Khehar said the MP chief justice should not have any further role in the inquiry into the former Gwalior additional district judge’s complaint of sexual harassment against a sitting HC judge as he has assumed a firm position in the case.

“The Chief Justice of India may re-initiate the investigative process, under the in-house procedure, by vesting the authority required to be discharged by the MP HC CJ, to a chief justice of some other HC, or alternatively, the CJI may himself assume the said role,” the court said.

Importantly, to make the investigative process fair and just, the bench said: “It is imperative to divest the judge concerned (the HC Judge against whom sexual harassment charges were made) of his administrative and supervisory authority and control over witnesses, to be produced either on behalf of the complainant, or on behalf of the concerned judge himself.” It directed the HC CJ to do so immediately.

Reacting to the judgment, the “accused” judge’s daughter sent an e-mail to TOI and said: “I would like to request you to refrain from making any personal remarks and statements as the matter is still pending investigation and is under the further action of the Chief Justice of India and it relates to a sitting member of the higher judiciary.”

“As there have been no findings with respect to the guilt or conduct of my father, as the Supreme Court did not go into the merits of the matter, I would request you to kindly bear the same in mind and report the judgment whilst exercising your discretion,” she said.

On August 4, the TOI was first to break the story on how an additional district and sessions judge in Gwalior, who was heading the Vishaka committee against sexual harassment, could not save herself from the prying eyes of a Madhya Pradesh high court judge and resigned from judicial service to protect her “dignity, womanhood and self-esteem”.

In her complaint to then CJI RM Lodha and Supreme Court judges Justices HL Dattu (now CJI), T S Thakur, Anil R Dave, Dipak Misra and Arun Misra, as well as the MP HC chief justice A M Khanwilkar, she said the administrative judge sent her a message through the district registrar to “perform dance on an item song” at a function at his residence. She avoided the function on the pretext of her daughter’s birthday.

TOI | Dec 19, 2014

Contact Lawyers In India : https://lawintellectindia.com/contact-us/

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Disclaimer

In accordance with the Bar Council of India rules, Law Intellect India does not solicit work or advertise through this website. By clicking ‘I agree,’ you acknowledge that you are accessing this information voluntarily and that no attorney-client relationship is created through this site.

The content on this website is for informational purposes only and should not be taken as legal advice. We disclaim any liability for actions taken based on the information provided. For personalized legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.

Please review and accept our Privacy Policy before using this website. All intellectual property rights related to the website and its content belong to the Firm.