Allegations against CJI: Ex-SC employee not to participate in-house inquiry panel proceedings

A former apex court employee, who levelled allegations of sexual harassment against Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, decided Tuesday not to participate anymore before the in-house inquiry panel.

The employee said in a statement that Tuesday was the third day she had gone to participate before the three-member panel headed by Justice SA Bobde.

"But due to serious concerns and reservations, I am no longer participating in these in-house committee proceedings," she said in a statement. 

"I joined and participated in the Committee proceedings in good faith on 26th and 29th April 2019 with the hope that this committee would proceed in a manner that is fair to me and sensitive to my circumstances. Despite the fact that the committee was an in-house committee of sitting judges junior to the CJI and not an external committee as I had requested, I joined the proceedings with a lot of hope considering that the committee comprised of such eminent Hon’ble judges. I felt that this committee will hear my sufferings and finally justice will be done to me and my family," she said in the statement.  

The allegations levelled by the former woman employee of the Supreme Court are being inquired into by a three-judge panel of the apex court which held its first proceeding on Friday last. The three-member panel conducted its first in-chamber sitting during which the woman and the secretary general of the apex court appeared before it, an official source said.

The source said the secretary general was present before the panel, also comprising two women judges -- Indu Malhotra and Indira Banerjee -- with all documents and materials.

"In the Committee hearing that took place on 26th April 2019, the Judges in the committee told me that this was neither an in-house committee proceeding, nor a proceeding under the Vishakha Guidelines and that it was an informal proceeding. I was asked to narrate my account which I did to the best of my ability even though I felt quite intimidated and nervous in the presence of three Hon’ble Judges of the Supreme Court and without having a lawyer or support person with me,"  she added. 

"Further the committee declined my request for video recording of the committee proceedings. I was also clearly told that no lawyer/support person could be present with me during the committee hearing. I was orally instructed that I should not disclose the proceedings of the committee to the media and was to not even share the proceedings with my lawyer Advocate Vrinda Grover. I was asked to appear before the Committee on 29th April for the next hearing," the statement added. 

During the hearing, only the woman was present and the secretary general was not privy to the proceedings. An activist advocate who had accompanied the woman to the apex court was not part of the proceedings, the source said on Friday.

On April 23, Justice Bobde had said that the in-house procedure did not contemplate representation of advocates on behalf of parties as it was not a formal judicial proceeding. He had clarified that there was no time-frame to complete the inquiry and the future course of action will depend on "what comes out of the inquiry" which will be "confidential".

She said that she had placed an application before the Committee on Friday g to summon the CDR and WhatsApp call and chat records of two relevant mobile numbers. "However the Committee did not accept my application on the first hearing. The same application was finally taken by the Committee on 30th April 2019, when feeling helpless and distressed I could no longer continue to participate in the Committee hearings," she said. 

She further claimed that she a car she was travelling in being followed by two men on a motorcycle.

She said she was compelled to walk out of the committee proceedings on Tuesday because the "committee seemed not to appreciate the fact that this was not an ordinary complaint but was a complaint of sexual harassment against a sitting CJI and therefore it was require to adopt procedure that would ensure fairness and equality in the highly unequal circumstances that I am placed."

I had hoped that the approach of the committee towards me would be sensitive and not one that would cause me further fear, anxiety and trauma, she said. 

I have not been informed if the committee has sought any response from the CJI to my complaint and I have been left guessing and anxious on all these matters, she added.

She said she has decided not to participate in proceedings for several reasons: "I have not been allowed to have the presence of my lawyer. There being no video or audio recording of the Committee proceedings.  I have not been supplied even a copy of my statement as recorded on 26th and 29th April 2019.  I was not informed about the procedure this committee is following."

"I felt I was not likely to get justice from this committee and so I am no longer participating in the 3 Judge Committee proceedings," she said. 

Justice Indu Malhotra was Thursday appointed a new member of the committee after Justice N V Ramana recused himself. The development followed the complainant's letter to the panel on Wednesday, expressing reservation over the inclusion of Justice Ramana on the ground that he is a close friend of the CJI and a regular visitor to his house.

In the letter, she had also raised question over the presence of only one woman apex court judge -- Indira Banerjee -- in the panel set up to examine her allegations against the CJI. According to her, it was not in accordance with the Vishaka Guidelines.

Justice Ramana, while recusing himself, had termed as "baseless and unfounded" the "aspersions" cast by the woman on him.

The woman's allegations against the CJI were brought into the public domain by some news web portals on April 20.

She had worked at Justice Gogoi's home office in Delhi and the allegations were carried by the news portals based on her affidavit which was sent to 22 judges of the top court.

In her affidavit, the woman described two incidents of alleged harassment, days after Justice Gogoi was appointed CJI last October and her subsequent persecution.

The woman alleged that she was removed from service after she rebuffed his "sexual advances". She claimed that her husband and brother-in-law, both of whom were head constables, were suspended for a 2012 criminal case that had been mutually resolved. 

(With PTI inputs)