In particular, she alleged two specific incidents of sexual harassment in October, 2018, within days of Justice Gogoi becoming the Chief Justice of India. Following her refusal to reciprocate the advances, she alleged that what followed was systematic persecution of the complainant for months wherein she lost her job in Supreme Court, her husband and her brother who worked in Delhi Police too were suspended, and false complaints of cheating were filed against her resulting in her arrest and custodial torture. The Complainant then asked for a special inquiry committee comprising of retired Supreme Court judges to investigate her allegations against the current CJI. The allegations were specific, detailed, contemporary, and accompanied with audio and video recordings. The Complainant’s affidavit was sent to 22 Judges of the Supreme Court and to the media outlets.

While the Secretary General of the Supreme Court denied the allegations, on Saturday, the Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi, in a shocking case of complete abuse of power, called a special hearing of three judges, including himself, Justice Arun Mishra and Justice Sanjiv Khanna. Even the Attorney General of India, K.K. Venugopal, and the Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, were called in, and the latter in fact mentioned the case before the CJI. It is bizarre why the Government Law Officers were summoned, and who were they representing.

The hearing went from bizarre to farcical when the CJI began to cast aspersions on the complainant, her alleged criminal history, and how this was an attempt to ‘deactivate the office of Chief Justice’, and a grave threat to the independence of judiciary. All these happened without the presence of the Complainant or her lawyer. In fact, on the same day, the Delhi Police had filed for cancellation of her bail, which was granted to her in an alleged cheating case, and the hearing was adjourned. This is the first time in the history of Indian Judiciary that a CJI was accused of sexual harassment, and he was sitting on the Bench deliberating on the same issue. This goes against the principles of natural justice as well as the fundamental tenets of due process.

The issue of sexual harassment allegedly perpetrated by the Judges has been in public domain for the last 5-6 years, starting with allegations against Justice A.K. Ganguly in 2013. With the passing of the Sexual Harassment at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 ‘SHW Act’), which mandated the establishment of Internal Complaints Committee (‘ICC’) to enquire into complaints of sexual harassment. Though an ICC is set up with regard to the Supreme Court, such ICC is not empowered to investigate allegations against the Judges, but only against the staff or lawyers working in the Supreme Court.

With respect to Judges, there exists a separate procedure, namely, ‘In-House Procedure’, wherein if a complaint is received against a Judge of the Supreme Court by the CJI or forwarded to the CJI by the President of India, then the CJI would first examine the complaint, and if found to be substantive requiring a deeper probe, the CJI would set up an inquiry committee of three Supreme Court judges who would examine the complaint, and follow a due procedure. However, the In-House Procedure does not contemplate a situation where the Chief Justice of India is charged with sexual misconduct, as is the present case.

In fact, there is case pending in the Supreme Court for the last five years [Ms. X v. Secretary General, Supreme Court of India [Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 15 of 2014], which asked for an appropriate mechanism to be established to deal with complaints of sexual harassment against Judges, but no hearing has happened in that case. It is clear that the Supreme Court as an institution has been found severely wanting in setting up mechanisms to deal with sexual harassment complaints pertaining to sitting Judges (and retired as well). Instead, as is evident in the present case, it has taken a strident anti-victim position, without following any procedure of law.

In fact, the current case is not just a case of sexual harassment simplicitor, but allegations of complete abuse of power and gross victimisation of the complainant and her entire family have been levelled, which requires a thorough and impartial investigation. But the question is who would conduct the inquiry? Evidently, the Government seemed to have knowledge about the alleged sexual harassment, and chose to keep silent or in fact, supported the CJI, as evident from the statements of AG and SG in the Supreme Court.

If 12th January, 2018 press conference was a seminal point in the history of independent Judiciary, which witnessed the participation of the CJI, then the hearing on 20th April, 2019 was a blot on the integrity and propriety of the judiciary, especially the office of CJI. It is now up to the other judges of the Supreme Court to come up with a mechanism examining the allegations and bringing out the truth, keeping in mind the letter and spirit of the SHW Act, and the Constitutional principles of gender equality and prevention of sexual harassment under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution. The judiciary is not under threat from complaints of sexual harassment, but totally threatened by this brazen misuse of power by the highest constitutional functionary of the Supreme Court. (IPA Service)