New Delhi/Kolkata: A former law intern, who accused ex-Supreme Court judge A K Ganguly of sexual harassment, has hit back at him for denying the charges and hinted that she may file a police complaint.
"Those who have been spreading rumours and politicising the issue, are doing so out of prejudice and malice to obfuscate the issue and escape scrutiny and accountability," the intern wrote on her blog on Legally India.
Her comments came a day after Justice Ganguly had written an eight-page letter to Chief Justice of India P Sathasivam, denying that he had sexually harassed the intern and alleging there was a "palpable design" to malign him because of the judgements he had given against "powerful interests".
Indicating that she may lodge a police complaint, the intern said,"I request that it be acknowledged that I have the discernment to pursue appropriate proceedings at appropriate times. I ask that my autonomy be respected fully."
The intern said that any one claiming that her statements were false was showing disrespect not just to her but also to the Supreme Court.
"I would like to state that I have acted with utmost responsibility throughout, keeping in mind the seriousness of this situation," she said.
In Kolkata, Justice Ganguly said he would not comment on the intern's response.
"I don't want to say anything on the matter. I have no reaction," he said on being asked by PTI about the intern's rebuttal.
Read here - I don't want to say anything: Ganguly
Mounting pressure on the judge, Trinamool Congress asked him to step down as chairman of the West Bengal Human Rights Commission (WBHRC) on moral grounds.
"What he has written to the Chief Justice of India, P Sathasivam, is his business. It is not our political demand but a demand for decency and justice that he should step down on moral grounds", senior TMC leader and party MP Saugata Roy said.
A group of lawyers and retired judges today took out a protest march in Kolkata demanding the sacking of Justice Ganguly as chairman of the WBHRC.
Read on: Ganguly sees a 'palpable design' in row
A three-judge Supreme Court panel had indicted Justice Ganguly by holding that the statement of the intern, both written and oral, had prima facie disclosed "an act of unwelcome behaviour (unwelcome verbal/non-verbal conduct of sexual nature)" by the judge with her in the Le Meridien hotel room on December 24 last year.
In her rebuttal to Justice Ganguly's letter, the intern said that after the incident when she had returned to her college in Kolkata, she had spoken to some of her faculty at different times.
"Since the incident occurred during an internship, and the University did not have a policy against sexual harassment of women students during internship, it was indicated to me that any action would be ineffective.
"I was also informed that the only route for me was to file a complaint with the police, which I was reluctant to do. However, I felt it was important to warn young law students that status and position should not be confused for standards of morality and ethics. Hence, I chose to do so via a blog post," she said.
The intern said that while deposing before the three- judge committee probing her allegation against Justice Ganguly, she had "sought confidentiality of proceedings keeping in mind the gravity of the situation, as well as the privacy of everyone involved".
"I did not question the jurisdiction or intent of the three-member Judges' Committee at any point, and had full faith that they would establish the truth of my statements," she said.
She said that the apex court panel had acted with great discretion given the delicate nature of the case and she appreciated it. The intern said after appearing before the panel on November 18 and giving an oral statement before it, she had also submitted to it a written statement signed by her.
On November 29, she had sent an affidavit to Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising, disclosing to her details of sexual harassment and requested her to seek appropriate action. The contents of the affidavit are substantially the same as the statements made by her before the panel, she said.
"Even after the operative portion of the report of the Committee, was made public, many eminent citizens and legal luminaries continued to deride the Committee's findings, and malign me. "Hence, I found it necessary to clarify the details of my statement to preserve my own dignity as well as that of the Supreme Court. Therefore, I authorized Indira Jaising, to make my statement public," she said.
Next: Govt to send Prez reference to SC for probe against Ganguly
Govt to send Prez reference to SC for probe against Ganguly
New Delhi: Government is likely to send a Presidential reference to Supreme Court for conducting a probe into the allegation of sexual harassment against Justice (retd) A.K. Ganguly after Attorney General has endorsed it.
The Home Ministry is expected to place a note, for sending a Presidential reference, before the Union Cabinet soon incorporating the views of Attorney General G E Vahanvati who has noted that a case can be made out against Ganguly following allegations of "unwelcome behaviour" towards a woman law intern.
Sources said once the Cabinet clears the proposal, it will be sent to President Pranab Mukherjee for approval.
The Home Ministry then will send the Presidential reference to Chief Justice of India for conducting a fresh probe into the whole incident.
The Attorney General's suggestions came after his views were sought on a letter to the President by West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee seeking Ganguly's removal from chairmanship of West Bengal Human Rights Commission following a woman law intern's allegation of sexual harassment against the former judge.
Justice Ganguly has strongly denied the charge and refused to quit his post.
Sources said the Attorney General had been asked to give views on whether any case can be made out on three issues -- the allegation of sexual harassment against Ganguly, his visit to Pakistan without informing the West Bengal government and taking an assignment from All India Football Federation despite holding the high post of human rights commission.
The Protection of Human Rights Act is clear that a Chairperson or member of the NHRC or a state human rights commission can only be removed "by order of the President of India on the grounds of proven misbehaviour or incapacity after the Supreme Court, on reference being made to it by the President, has, on enquiry...reported that the Chairperson or the member, as the case may be, ought on any such ground to be removed."
