Citing Intimidation, Complainant Against CJI Opts Out of Inquiry

The complainant claimed that instead of ensuring fairness, the in-house panel caused her further fear and anxiety.

Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi.

(Photo: Kamran Akhter/The Quint)

A former apex court employee, who levelled allegations of sexual harassment against Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, decided on Tuesday, 30 April, not to participate any more before the in-house inquiry panel, citing intimidation and lack of faith in them.

The woman, who issued the press statement after participating in the proceedings for three days before the three-member panel headed by Justice S A Bobde, also expressed apprehension that she was "not likely to get justice" from the panel which not only refused her request for presence of lawyer Vrinda Grover during the proceedings but also told her if she did not participate "they would proceed ex-parte".

She said the panel, which comprised two women judges of the apex court – Justices Indu Malhotra and Indira Banerjee – conducted the proceedings without video or audio recording and she was not even supplied with a copy of her statement recorded on 26 April and 29 April.

“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. I had also pointed out to the committee that I had lost hearing in one ear completely due to stress and I was undergoing daily treatment for the same.”

Complainant Statement

“I Felt I Was Not Likely to Get Justice From This Committee”

She claimed that the committee also did not inform about the procedure that was to be followed during the inquiry.

"I felt I was not likely to get justice from this committee and so I am no longer participating in the three-Judge Committee proceedings," she said, adding that the panel on Tuesday declined her request for summoning of Call Detail records and WhatsApp details of two relevant mobile numbers which made her helpless and distressed from participating before the panel.

‘Panel Causing Further Fear, Anxiety’

“I was compelled to walk out of the committee proceedings today 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 required to adopt procedure that would ensure fairness and equality in the highly unequal circumstances that I am placed in. 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.”

Complainant Statement

“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 further said.

‘Repeatedly Asked Why I Made the Sexual Harassment Complaint so Late’

The woman claimed that she was repeatedly asked by the committee as to why she made this complaint of sexual harassment so late.

"I found the atmosphere of the committee very frightening and I was very nervous because of being confronted and questioned by three Supreme Court Judges and without even the presence of my lawyer/support person," she said.

‘Joined the Probe With a Lot of Hope But Will no Longer Participate in the Proceedings Due to Serious Concerns’

The former woman employee, who narrated the sequence of events since 20 April when her allegations against the CJI became public to the setting up of the panel and its proceedings for three days, said she joined the proceedings with a lot of hope.

“But due to serious concerns and reservations, I am no longer participating in these in-house committee proceedings. I joined and participated in the Committee proceedings in good faith on April 26 and 29, 2019 with the hope that this committee would proceed in a manner that is fair to me and sensitive to my circumstances.”

Complainant Statement

The woman said despite the fact that it was an in-house committee of sitting judges junior to the CJI and not an external committee as she had requested, she "joined the proceedings with a lot of hope considering that the committee comprised of such eminent judges".

“Despite the fact that this was an in-house committee and not an external committee, I decided to participate in the proceedings. I, however, requested the committee to inform me about the procedure to be followed by the committee, to follow the requirements of the Vishakha guidelines and the Prevention of Sexual Harassment Against Women at the Workplace Act, to allow me to have the assistance of a lawyer/support person of my choice and for video recording of the proceedings.”

Complainant Statement

"I felt that this committee will hear my sufferings and finally justice will be done to me and my family," she added.

The woman claimed that on 19 April, she had made a detailed complaint of sexual harassment and victimisation against the Chief Justice of India by means of an affidavit dated 18 April.

She said she had written to all the Judges of the Supreme Court to constitute a special enquiry committee of senior retired Judges of the apex court to enquire into her complaint of sexual harassment and the consequent victimisation.

“I did not think that any in-house body or the committee constituted under the Prevention of Sexual Harassment Act, would be able to fairly deal with my complaint, given the fact that the person against whom I had made the complaint was the Chief Justice of India. My complaint is in the public domain.”

Complainant Statement

She also expressed dismay that the CJI on 20 April on Saturday, which was a court holiday constituted a special bench comprising of himself and two other judges and in that hearing levelled various allegations against her in her absence.

"I had also pointed out to the committee that I had lost hearing in one ear completely due to stress and I was undergoing daily treatment for the same. As a result of this I was sometimes unable to hear what was being dictated by Justice Bobde to the court official as a record of my statements before the committee," she said adding she was orally instructed not to disclose anything to media.

‘Was Being Followed by Bike-Borne Men Outside Court’

The complainant also said in her statement that she was also "scared of her safety" as she was followed by two to four men while returning from the proceedings.

“After I left the first Committee hearing on the first day, I saw that the car I travelling by was being followed by two men on a motorcycle whose partial number I was able to note,” she said.

She added, “I again pointed out that when I left the Committee hearing on 29th April at around 7.30pm I was followed by four men on two motorcycles and I was scared for my safety.”