This write up starts with an unconditional apology to the Supreme Court, for any unintentional contempt of court, that may be committed, by a common man who seeks accountability and transparency in its conduct. With due respect, the conduct and proceedings of the Supreme Court, in the grave episode of allegations of sexual misconduct against the Chief Justice, do not behove the Supreme Court and the respect that it expects the common man to have for it. It is the final dispenser of justice in India, which needs utter transparency and strict adherence to the due process of law, both of which seem to have been compromised in this case. Ever heard a person, accused of such serious charges, however baseless and speculative they be, being exonerated by a committee of judges in just two weeks. In any other case perhaps, even bail would not have been granted to the accused, forget a closure of the case, with no possibility of any further appeal.
The shocking allegations that emerge out of a detailed 28 page affidavit, supported by evidence, filed by a very junior lady employee of the SC, perhaps in the lowest rungs of its hierarchy is that she is a low ranking employee of the SC, pursuing her LLB, who got noticed by the CJI Justice Ranjan Gogoi for her good work. She soon started receiving preferred privileged treatment by the CJI, which included assignments/postings, much above her eligible level and finally was posted at his home office, which brought her into direct personal interaction with the CJI. She repeatedly speaks of her gratitude to the CJI, who apart from her cream postings, also got a job for her handicapped brother in law. She also indicates his willing appreciation/liking for her, by the fact that she and her husband, a head constable in Delhi Police, were part of special elite invitees to attend the swearing in ceremony of Justice Ranjan Gogoi as the CJI, at Rashtrapati Bhavan. It is in para 24 to 28 of her detailed affidavit that she alleges sexual misconduct by the CJI, in as much as that he tightly hugged her one day and felt her inappropriately. She says that it is for her refusal to submit to these demands of the CJI, that led to her harassment, which included her multiple transfers, final suspension on charges of having taken Rs.50000 from someone to get a job in the SC, and the suspension of her husband and brother in law from their jobs. Her plea immediately echoed in the corridors of the SC, where women lawyers strangely said that they no longer feel safe working in the SC.
Such charges could be utterly false, malicious and baseless, but they yet warranted a very judicious and transparent handling. It is needed not just because of the seriousness of the charges, but also because it involved the CJI of India. The irony is that the Supreme Court which is the sacred protector and paragon of judicial propriety, procedures and justice, with due respect, failed at this crucial juncture. The lapses in handling were numerous and serious too, indicating a miscarriage and denial of justice. At the very inception, very surprisingly, contrary to judicial principles and conduct, the CJI, who for the matter of record is the accused in this case, presided over the three judge bench that discussed his case, which he should not have done. Then a retired justice of the SC was appointed by the SC to probe the matter, with help from the CBI, IB and Delhi Police, thus loading the dice against the hapless complainant. And finally a committee of judges, who report to the CJI, with no outsider as a member was appointed to investigate the charges levied against the CJI. The committee did not permit the plaintiff’s lawyer to be present, did not give her a copy of the statement, did not conduct the proceedings under audio/video recording and finally unsurprisingly passed an exparte order to hurriedly exonerate the CJI, within a matter of two weeks.
If the allegations of the complainant are termed as frivolous, then so is the manner in which the CJI was given a clean chit by his brother judges. Where was the need to close such a serious matter, even without a proper hearing. Such conduct shows that the Supreme Court has been preferring an opaque mode of functioning, right from the inscrutable manner in which judges are appointed by a collegium, to the way in which cases are fixed and their manner of disposal. The fact that Supreme Court orders can be altered after they are pronounced but before they are loaded on its websites and that frivolous PILs get priority of hearing over other much urgent maters, shows that it is rife with fixers and corruption. We are holding no brief for the lady who made such serious allegations against the CJI, but are certainly saying that the hasty manner in which the case was heard and closed, gave rise to more questions than answers and only confirmed the prevailing perception that all is not well with the Supreme Court.
As an independent media platform, we do not take advertisements from governments and corporate houses. It is you, our readers, who have supported us on our journey to do honest and unbiased journalism. Please contribute, so that we can continue to do the same in future.
