The panel in the three probe judicial inquiry into allegations of sex harassment against a former apex court judge, has submitted its report to the Chief Justice of India (CJI), identifying former Justice Asok Kumar Ganguly as the alleged perpetrator.
The report was submitted yesterday after the three judges met six times, reported IANS, containing statements from the alleged victim (“SJ”), a young lawyer who had also interned in the Supreme Court, and a statement of Ganguly, who retired from the Supreme Court in February 2012.
A court official reportedly said:
“The committee constituted to inquire into the allegations of sexual harassment levelled by the law intern against a former SC judge held its meetings on November 13,18, 19, 20, 21, 26 and 27.
“The statement of law intern was recorded. She had also submitted three affidavits. The statement of Mr. Justice (retired) AK Ganguly has also been recorded by the committee. The committee has submitted its report to the CJI on November 28.”
Ganguly denied the allegations, according to NDTV’s Twitter feed. In a telephone interview, Ganguly told NDTV: “I have denied in my statement about all allegations of sexual harassment. I’m totally innocent, and am a victim of situation.”
Responding to whether he had a comment to SJ’s allegations, he said: “I have worked with several interns in my life, a large number of them. I treat them like my children, they are all well placed in several places in their life. Nobody had made any allegations [before], I am shocked and shattered.”
He told NDTV that he did not know yet how he would move forward, and added, “Please don’t compare this case with Tejpal’s case, please.”
Ganguly told CNN-IBN, according to Firstpost:
“I totally deny the allegation and I am a victim of situations… Of course I knew the intern, she worked with me, she even came to my house. She never raised any of these issues with me… When I was in Delhi, she was also there.. She knew I was there so she came on her own. She came, she had dinner with me and thereafter she left… She is like my child and I have treated with kindness… I am very sorry and shocked… In her blog she says she has respect for me… she has not suffered no physical harm or injury… How can I prove the negative?”
He reportedly added:
“I still don’t have a copy of the affidavit filed by her… I know people will judge me, but I still have faith in people. I have not spoken to the girl… I tried twice but she did not respond… People of the country will judge my judicial work.”
PTI reported Ganguly as saying that “if anybody feels uncomfortable to work with me she was free to leave”. Responding to whether the inquiry would pass stricture against him, he said that “I don’t know what kind of strictures will be there” in response to whether
SJ had requested the inquiry to keep her deposition and evidence confidential.
Ganguly told CNN-IBN: “With a very heavy heart, I want to say if this trend continues, it will be difficult for upright judges to continue… I am not saying anyone is biased… I’m just saying this trend is dangerous.”
NDTV reported that the Supreme Court deputy registrar as saying that Ganguly had deposed before the inquiry, for which SJ had submitted three affidavits in addition to her deposition before the inquiry on 18 November. NDTV sources said that they had told the committee that Ganguly’s name should be disclosed to lift suspicion from other recently retired judges, though no one knew what the committee had recommended in its report.
Several media reports, citing unnamed sources in the court or sources supposedly close to the accused judge, had misreported several aspects of the inquiry, erroneously claiming that SJ had not named the judge before the inquiry, that she had ruled out any legal action, and that she had left the committee hanging by not appearing a second time. SJ later released a statement requesting media reports to stop distorting facts and that she remained confident in the inquiry.
A friend of SJ told Legally India two weeks ago that SJ had in fact told the committee the name of the judge, had not precluded further legal action, and had let the committee know she would not appear a second time.
Ganguly: Human Rights Commission & NUJS
AK Ganguly is currently the chairman of the West Bengal Human Rights Commission and an honorary professor at NUJS Kolkata, where SJ was a student while she interned with him.
Outlook reported on 25 November that:
teachers, administrators and students of the university the girl graduated from [NUJS] confirmed that SJ and another graduate did go to work for the said judge [Ganguly] in 2012. The two law students were informally deputed to work for the retired SC judge as research associates on a book he was writing.
The judge had requested the university’s vice-chancellor [Prof Dr Ishwara Bhat] to send him interns for this purpose. The V-C obliged and SJ and another student were sent. The judge is currently an honorary professor at a law university where he teaches a course on constitutional litigation…
[NUJS vice-chancellor Bhat] said “it’s really quite embarrassing”. He would not officially confirm or deny whether SJ had worked for the judge in 2012 on the said date. He insisted he was unaware whether any student had been sent to work with the judge. He said there was no complaint yet and therefore the university could not be expected to act on a blog post. On the judge’s affiliation with the university: “He is taking a class. It will continue. We will provide any support that is necessary to the legal system.”…
Ganguly said, according to a PTI report today, that SJ had not been officially allocated to work with him but replaced another intern who went abroad after getting married: “I never put up a poster. She came on her own.”
Outlook wrote:
The alleged incident took place in a prominent hotel on Christmas eve where the judge was staying during a visit to the capital. SJ was summoned by the judge to his hotel. It is learnt that he even asked the hotel staff to arrange for a separate room for her. After they declined his request, he apparently suggested that SJ stay in his room given the apparent danger to women during late hours in Delhi. She declined. He then allegedly made the advances, the girl now reports. She went to the lobby, sought help and left the hotel.
At the Supreme Court from 17 December 2008 until 3 February 2012, Ganguly passed many important judgments, perhaps most notably when he presided over the bench that quashed 2G mobile phone licences that were awarded improperly [Wikipedia].
Before he was elevated to the apex court, he was the Chief Justice of the Orissa high court between 2007 and 2008, and the Madras high court from May until December 2008. He had started his judicial career in 1994 at the Calcutta high court.
The allegations’ history
Late on 11 November a second former student intern of Ganguly corroborated parts of SJ’s account in a comment made on social media, as reported by Legally India on 14 November. She wrote that she had reprimanded Ganguly about the alleged incident, and the former judge had “promised, incidentally, that he would never misbehave with another lady”.
The Supreme Court commission of Justices RM Lodha, HL Dattu and Ranjana Prakash Desai was set up on 12 November, a few hours after the allegations had hit the mainstream media earlier that day, following an interview with SJ in Legally India the previous day and a blog post by SJ with the allegation on 6 November.
On 17 November, before Ganguly’s name was publicly linked to the allegation, he was reported by the Mail Today to have said: “I do not want to make any comments at this juncture. But this allegation is coming after almost a year and that too through a blog. A committee has been formed by the Supreme Court and it will take a decision after recording the girl’s statement.”
Comments
And how much of her actions will be understood as so consistent with a woman who has experienced SH?
She has already expressed how the experience was like being viewed with suspicion. Hardly the kind of gender enabling environment within which a complainant should have had to depose.
Undoubtedly true. The Judges and Lawyers worked with him in Courts knew it pretty well.
He is a person with high ethics and integrity.
The allegations are just unbelievable.
true that!
Why should this have some sort of political connotation? The man [allegedly ...] - simple. It has nothing to do with his ability as a judge.
Sir, you are a despicable and cowardly human being. The fact that you do not see the courage that it takes for a first year law graduate to raise an issue of this regard and immediately raise a political motive.
Whether this amounts to harassment or not is a matter of proof and evidence. To give it a colour of political bias is nothing short of abuse.
To use Arundhati Roy's words in a different yet similar context, this is the "second rape" the poor intern is being subject to.
In your fevered imagination, a political party identified a young woman (you have no idea of her upbringing and political affiliations) and brainwashed her into accusing a retired judge for sexual harassment just to bring down the prestige of the Supreme Court.
Your words reveal more about you than hiding your name does- but if you were honest, you should have written, instead of guest, "jackass"
Would he be liable only if the victim had suffered physical harm or injury? Even in the Tehelka case, no physical injury was caused to the victim.
Why are you playing the SEO game here by writing "Lawctopus" unnecessarily? Thats a website for internships. Nothing less and nothing more.
UP-ites like ND Tiwari cannot stay without...
South Indians like Phaneesh Murthy cannot stay without...
UP-ites like ND Tiwari cannot stay without...
South Indians like Phaneesh Murthy cannot stay without...[/quote]
Kaay re baana! Tumi ki bolsheesh!
and yeah, Legally-India should also take this matter seriously, they should also investigate this thing at their personal level. And just a last request - Don't be like India TV on this issue. report good and report ethically. don't go by rumours..
And this cunning lady also told her friends and her college authorities a year back to ensure a trail of the events.
I wish I was so cunning.
The students and faculty should write a petition to Mamata Banerjee and include other grievances about NUJS in the petition. Let Mamata summon Ishwar Bhat... we'll see who's the boss!
1. Even assuming that the said incident happened. Sexual Harassment at Workplace laws cannot be invoked as the facts state otherwise.
2. Sexual Harassment as defined under Criminal Amendment Act 2013 has no applicability as the incident happened before it came in force.
3. Outraging the Modesty of Woman- Have to be proved but the victim doesn't want an action and the offence would require presence of assault or force.
4. SC has no jurisdiction to make such committee.
5. No response from government means they are busy with elections and more politically inclined cases.
6. Media trial is very much on going by the reporting the accused is already a convict.
7. Bored people are reading these stories and comments.
Please read as "Please this "not" should be construed that Im announcing the Judge innocent and the intern wrong" i missed the "not" there...sorry for the error as I may construed otherwise for a missing word here and there
If seen closely, the bare fact is that it boils down to the word of an intern against the word of a retired SC judge who by all accounts has an unblemished career of 45+ years in the legal profession. I agree that does not mean he cannot be guilty. But on what basis do people think they have the right to slander or shame the judge on the basis of a single statement of the complainant? Especially when this is uncorroborated by any other evidence or fact or medical test etc. (excluding hearsay of the "second intern" who was not present when these alleged assaults took place).
The complainant's statement that she feels "humiliated" by being asked to prove her claim is regrettable but every complainant, every plaintiff and every person who brings legal action against another person is required to establish the veracity of their statement. It is a difficult process admittedly (IAS , IPS functionaries are quite often "humiliated" in higher courts when judges take a fancy for berating them) but every person who makes an allegation must be prepared to do so, more so in a criminal charge where proof is required "beyond reasonable doubt". Conviction is a very serious matter and lives of people cannot be decided by believing one person's word against others.
It is a established fact that the judge has created many enemies by his rulings both in the SC and the WBHRC. Politicians have publicly threatened to "finish" him off. Whether this angle needs to be investigated is also relevant.
Also, unlike the Tejpal case where he promptly admitted at least in part, here the judge has categorically denied in no uncertain terms the allegation.
So lets not get overexcited simply because Kian and co. are trying to get everyone worked up on the complainant's behalf. As a matter of fact in senior govt. and legal circles (including women who know Mr Ganguly longer than the complainant has been alive), this allegation comes across as extremely difficult to believe.
I have no sympathy for sexual predators but this trial by media panders only to the hands of mischief-makers like LegallyIndia who are out only to make headline moment, not care for the truth.
Gosh, a fake poster using my anon handle! And only one or two grammatical errors. In two sentences.
Aside from checking the holographic label at the bottom of each of my posts, you can identify a real Dazed and Confused post by certain grammatical or rhetorical hallmarks, or spot a fake by the presence of certain common errors.
One hallmark is avoidance of sincere cliche, such as "bleeding hearts," which is something either a Chetan Bhagat fan or a 65-year old Barry Goldwater Republican would use with a straight face. I am neither.
Second, use of the quasi-literate Indianism, "of late." Again, this is useful when deployed ironically, as in, "Amarchand has become a more inclusive firm of late."
Third, I castigate or encourage LI in a direct voice, sending them to revisit Strunk and White or to review of "All the President's Men" to remind themselves of how to write and how to be a journalist. (I think they're doing better these days, and are no worse in their coverage of these scandals than any other media.)
So, don't be fooled by fakes. Accept only the pithy, cogent and occasionally pompous posts of the asli Dazed and Confused.
Gosh, a fake poster using my anon handle! And only one or two grammatical errors. In two sentences.
Aside from checking the holographic label at the bottom of each of my posts, you can identify a real Dazed and Confused post by certain grammatical or rhetorical hallmarks, or spot a fake by the presence of certain common errors.
One hallmark is avoidance of sincere cliche, such as "bleeding hearts," which is something either a Chetan Bhagat fan or a 65-year old Barry Goldwater Republican would use with a straight face. I am neither.
Second, use of the quasi-literate Indianism, "of late." Again, this is useful when deployed ironically, as in, "Amarchand has become a more inclusive firm of late."
Third, I castigate or encourage LI in a direct voice, sending them to revisit Strunk and White or to review of "All the President's Men" to remind themselves of how to write and how to be a journalist. (I think they're doing better these days, and are no worse in their coverage of these scandals than any other media.)
So, don't be fooled by fakes. Accept only the pithy, cogent and occasionally pompous posts of the asli Dazed and Confused.[/quote]
Waah! Beauty.
Gosh, a fake poster using my anon handle! And only one or two grammatical errors. In two sentences.
Aside from checking the holographic label at the bottom of each of my posts, you can identify a real Dazed and Confused post by certain grammatical or rhetorical hallmarks, or spot a fake by the presence of certain common errors.
One hallmark is avoidance of sincere cliche, such as "bleeding hearts," which is something either a Chetan Bhagat fan or a 65-year old Barry Goldwater Republican would use with a straight face. I am neither.
Second, use of the quasi-literate Indianism, "of late." Again, this is useful when deployed ironically, as in, "Amarchand has become a more inclusive firm of late."
Third, I castigate or encourage LI in a direct voice, sending them to revisit Strunk and White or to review of "All the President's Men" to remind themselves of how to write and how to be a journalist. (I think they're doing better these days, and are no worse in their coverage of these scandals than any other media.)
So, don't be fooled by fakes. Accept only the pithy, cogent and occasionally pompous posts of the asli Dazed and Confused.[/quote]
Dude, youre spending so much time defending a rubbish "handle" of yours ????? Like your father owns the phrase "Dazed and confused" ????
One of the most useless and timepass posts ever!
In 2006 I filed a consumer plaint against an airline for wrongful cancellation fees. It was a simple case but I had to keep making my statement in the face of rigorous cross examination by the opposite counsel. Many times it was humiliating, worse than humiliating but my lawyer told me that it is a required part of the process as otherwise every tom, dick and harry will make such complaints. That is how the law works and the complainant in this case (SJ) will have to accept it for what it is.
If her account is true, she has to be prepared to withstand cross examination even if it is humiliation for her. Otherwise we are degenerating into a khap-panchayat system where anyone can be convicted and lynched on the mere basis of an accusation. Without doubting her word, i fail to understand how /why she expresses "happyness" that everyone is aware of her plight but still refuses to lodge a formal complaint to the police. At least in the Tehelka incident the victim has not done such melodrama and promptly lodged a complaint against an equally famous accused.
Those who doubt me can imagine how they will feel if tomorrow their neighbour, colleague or friend suddenly accuses them of sexual assault without any basis and the law sustains this accusation merely on the word of the complainant.
Here is the video:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/audio-news-video/AV-India/Justice-Ganguly-under-suspension-executive-council-to-take-decision/Article2-1157549.aspx
Won't happen. Just like Tejpal censored stories in Tehelka Kian always censors stories on NUJS. In fact even MSM has done more reporting on the scams in NUJS. In today's Telegraph there is a front-page report on this plus the earlier sexual harassment scam in NUJS. http://www.telegraphindia.com/1131201/jsp/frontpage/story_17631303.jsp#.UpqyBbG6Zjo
so now even if he is innocent and even if he is acquitted everyone will just say that its power play and poor girl didnt get justice
….. You will be shocked to know that now (in WB) people do not marry bride from the family of LAWYER (Advocate) or POLICE. Many also avoid families who have already mis-used 498A (in case of sister or cousin) for money. Because, if any husband-wife problem they will apply all the laws like 498A, Domestic Violence Act against you.
…..Under section 498A the police arrest the entire family of husband without any cognizable (visible) evidence of crime. Husband-wife dispute is jurisdiction of Civil Court across the civilised world. Even women (myself) are also sufferer of these un-social Laws.
…..Even Folk Laws of Tribal community or Muslim Shariyat Law (with due respect) is far less cruel than the modern secular law of India. Your Comment please.
NB--Send your opinion. Forward the matter to your friends. Join the campaign