Original #InternJudge deposed for hours before SC inquiry, as unnamed sources ‘leak’ about confidential hearing

Tuesday, 19 November 2013 By Legally India Bar, Bench & Litigation

The named intern (“SJ”) appeared before the Supreme Court inquiry committee for 90 minutes yesterday to give a statement, reported the Times of India yesterday, adding that “it was not immediately known if she stood by her earlier statements or named the alleged perpetrator”.

Other media reported that SJ appeared for more than two hours after protests by a group of female lawyers near the courts earlier that day.

It is understood that SJ requested the committee, which is believed to have consisted of three judges and three members of court staff, to keep the content of her deposition confidential.

However, at least two newspapers, quoting unnamed “highly placed legal sources” or information known to the paper, have stated that SJ did not name the judge before the committee. Legally India has not able to confirm that claim independently or authoritatively at the time of going to press.

Some newspapers also reported, quoting other unnamed sources, that SJ stated before the inquiry that “she did not wish to pursue legal remedies”, which Legally India has been unable to confirm. The ET wrote, relying on “sources close to the retired judge”:

Her desire not to press charges against the judge, whose identity ET has not disclosed for lack of independent verification, could potentially place the committee in a bind. The panel will now have no option but to drop the charges if she doesn’t wish to press the charges, sources close to the retired judge said.

The committee consists of Justices RM Lodha, HL Dattu and Ranjana Desai and will convene again tomorrow (20 November) to hear further witnesses, it is understood.

Comments

Jack 19 Nov 2013, 13:54

+0 -0

How strange?!

Why doesn't SJ press charges or name the judge?

Jill 19 Nov 2013, 16:14

+0 -2

Read her blog post to understand why she is not naming the judge.

Jury 20 Nov 2013, 05:22

+5 -0

[quote name="Jill"]Read her blog post to understand why she is not naming the judge.[/quote]
Mr./Mrs.Jill,

The disclosure is expected of her before the committee not before you and me

Jury 19 Nov 2013, 13:55

+5 -2

How can she refuse to name the J. [i](that too, after creating an uproar in the Country) [/i]when the Apex Court has respected her sentiments and formed a committee comprising of the top-most Judges in the Nation.

Not pressing the charge may be her prerogative.

Will not maintaining silence after alleging sexual harrasement against a SC J. amount to contempt of court, when the act was alleged to have been done during the period when J. was in service?

Rajan 19 Nov 2013, 14:42

+1 -1

I am a bit perplexed at the cloak of secrecy which is being thrown over the entire matter. In every other sexual harassment case, though the identity of the victim is kept under wraps for obvious reasons, there has never been any hesitation in naming the accused. The woman lawyer has given enough clues which are sufficient for an investigative media source such as Cobrapost to zero in on the individual without much effort. As you have rightly pointed out, not identifying the accused judge by the accuser will leave no option to the enquiry panel but to dismiss the case ab initio. Obviously, no one else is ready to bell the cat for fear of being hauled up for defamation of an ex-SC judge in the absence of any adverse finding by the enquiry panel against any particular individual in this matter. In the final analysis, the young lady has just created a storm in a tea cup!

ABHA CHAWLA MOHANTY 19 Nov 2013, 14:10

+1 -0

IF, report,is true,.........the intern is under immense PRESSURE..

Jury 19 Nov 2013, 14:28

+2 -0

[quote name="ABHA CHAWLA MOHANTY"]IF, report,is true,.........the intern is under immense PRESSURE..[/quote]

Our judges are influential...

perplexed 20 Nov 2013, 05:32

+2 -6

it is really getting difficult to fathom the intention of the victim. as has been rightly pointed out in an earlier comment, this is perhaps the only instance where the victim's identity is out there in the open and that of the accused being kept deliberately clandestine. the obvious question arises was the entire episode only for the purpose of grabbing eyeballs? is the former intern trying to use her alleged misfortune as a stepping stone in her career and chalk out an image of 'iron lady' for herself? is she not in favour of justice being done? if the law of sexual harassment has been violated, who is she to forgive the accused? does she have the authority to do so? if she has taken a stance, it is her responsibility to clear the air so that the country gets to know the culprit who has had the audacity to demean his revered position and also to ensure that the offender doesn't go scot free. if not, her intentions are bound to be questioned. this has gone beyond a candid 'blog post' with beautiful words and literary jargon. i feel, she is playing a dangerous game, a very dangerous game.

Not Done 20 Nov 2013, 07:09

+3 -1

It is highly unfortunate that she is refusing to name the Judge.
If culprit goes unpunished then that is the point of creating so called 'awareness'.

AOR 20 Nov 2013, 13:22

I strongly believe the truth should come out in the open...instead of creating gossips around "who the judge could be" is dangerous and this how you are indirectly trying to defame and spur all untainted Hon'ble ex-SC Judges who retired around the same time as the concerned and alleged SC Judge has been sought to have been retired...this would be so unfair and also tantamount to demeaning retired SC Judges...Have myself been in this profession for 10 years....though have heard about certain senior counsels having "soft corners" for females in the profession .....thankfully never heard and or came across any incidents of sexual harassment...in fact its sometimes ur colleagues who try to link female juniors to their male bosses just because the particular female junior gets good work or appreciation from her senior for her sincerity to work...this is pretty common and kind of mud-slinging in law firms or chambers....
But anything which amounts to sexual harassment in law requires proper investigation as such crimes are not only against the individual but society/ community at large and rights of many may be jeopardized in future if no action taken....I would request all having gone thru any such harassment to come clean and bring the culprit to justice....

Dazed and Confused 21 Nov 2013, 04:41

She is not obligated to be a perfect victim, but she is expected to have the courage of her convictions. She has a professional obligation to the court to report unethical behavior by a member of the bar or other behavior that brings the court into ill repute. This situation is fundamentally different than the common workplace harassment complained of by Ms. Sood because of the alleged perpetrator's status as a judge.

Let her concentrate on her sworn duty as an advocate first and worry about the rest later.

Guest 24 Nov 2013, 06:57

Let the CJI of India allow the Committee to call others for a heaing on all the corruption and financial scams in NUJS. All the corruptions and financial scam papers with evidence will be submitted to the committee.

Commenting is closed for this article.