Supreme Court Enlists Attorney General’s Aid in Alleged Sexual Harassment Case Against West Bengal Governor

(Judicial Quest News Network)

July, 19,2024

The Apex Court on Friday agreed to hear a plea filed by a woman staff member of the West Bengal rajbhavan, seeking action against West Bengal Governor CV Ananda Bose for allegedly sexually harassing her.

The Court issued the notice in the case.

The petition has challenged the blanket immunity granted to the Governor under Article 361 of the Indian Constitution.

Article 361 (2) of the Indian Constitution states that no criminal proceedings can be initiated or continued against the President, or Governor of the State, in any court during their term in office.

A division bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, alongside Justices BJ Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, has requested the Attorney General for India, R Venkatramani, to provide assistance in addressing the petition concerning women’s rights.

The bench has also granted the liberty to the petitioner to implead the Union of Indai in the petitionand the West Bengal Government accepted the notice which is returnavble within three weeks in the plea.

Representing the petitioner senior advocate Shyam Divan submitted that the Article 361 of the Constitution cannot be a bar against investigation.

He said that it cannot be that there is no investigation. Evidence has to be gathered right now. It cannot be deffered indefinitely.

The petitioner alleged that allegations of sexual harassment and molestation, which once levelled against the accused, are sufficient and substantive to initiate the criminal justice process against the accused.

However, unfortunately, when the accused enjoys Constitutional or Statutory powers, as in the present case, it is very rare that a victim will come forward to lodge a complaint, and when she musters the courage to voice the injustice, she is virtually restrained by the contours of the Constitution.

It is further submmited that the “on literal reading of Article 361 of the Constitution, there is a complete bar on initiation of criminal proceedings whatsoever against the Governor and/or issue of notice to

the President or Governor as they are not answerable to any Court for the exercise and performance of their powers and duties. However, this Hon’ble Court ought to consider that the Constitution does not confer unfettered and absolute power on any authority, including the Parliament, to violate the basic elements of the Constitution which include Article 14 and Article 21, and whether the impediment under

Article 361 of the Constitution arises only when the acts are done in “exercise and performance of their powers and duties” or is it a blanket immunity, without any checks and balances.”

The petitioner claimed that the Governor had called her on April, 24 and may 2 on the false pretext of offering a better job only to sexually harass her within the premises of raj bhavan during working hours.

The Petitioner hails from Purba Medinipur, West Bengal and was merely discharging her duties when, out of the blue, the devious episode occurred not once but twice, wherein despite a categorical response from the Petitioner that she does not appreciate being touched in such a manner by the Hon’ble Governor, or being hugged in the said fashion, the Hon’ble Governor paid no heed.

The Petitioner in fact, also wrote a complaint to Raj Bhavan highlighting her grievances only to be subjected to humiliation in the form of inaction by concerned authorities, and being made a mockery of in the media and termed as a political tool, without any safeguards for her self-respect.

The petitioner contended that It is also to note that with lapse of time, there is a strong likelihood that the delay shall also affect the criminal machinery in ways, such as fabrication of evidence, tracing of witnesses, eye-witnesses and distortion of the versions of their statements, higher chances of influencing witnesses, etc, who continue to work under the perpetrator, and who has the entire state machinery at his disposal.

 This controversy against the Governor escalated only after West Bengal Chif Minister Mamta Banarjee issued statement that women no longer felt safe to enter the raj Bhavan in West Bengal.

In May, the Calacutta High Court had stayed proceddings against the Governor in a FIR lodged against hime an OSD-II to the Governor.

In that FIR the petitioner had claimed that the officer had taken undue advanatege of his position and pressurised her to refrain from lodging any complaint over the alleged sexual harassment incidents.

The petition is drawn and filed by Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee AOR and argued by senior Advocate Mr. Shyam Divan.