When men rights groups Barking (As Feminists groups call) to make sexual harassment law gender neutral and Punish mis user or False case complaintant, but no one was listening, Law makers, Judges or Political ministers. When same thing was bounced back on them, then only all will realize what Men right groups BARKING about.
here is one of such SAD stroy….
Following the allegations of sexual harassment against a retired judge of the Supreme Court of India, the Attorney General filed a petition on the same day asking for an investigation into the matter. When the matter was mentioned at 2 pm, the Chief Justice announced that he had set up a committee in his administrative capacity, of three judges, two being incumbent chief justices and a woman judge, to investigate and give a report to the Chief Justice.
The intern gave her statement to the committee, provided the affidavits of witnesses to whom she spoke immediately after the incident, gave all the mobile phone numbers of witnesses and of Justice Ganguly, and stood by her statement. Justice Ganguly was also called and his statement was video recorded. Apart from denying the allegations, he said the new law of 2013 making sexual harassment an offence did not apply to him as the alleged incident was of 2012, forgetting that outraging the modesty of a woman was always an offence, a law under which K P S Gill was prosecuted successfully by Rupan Deol Bajaj.
When the judge was named as A K Ganguly, it was clear that the alleged offence occurred during his tenure as chairman of the West Bengal Human Rights Commission, a post he continues to occupy. Justice Ganguly decided to brazen it out — he announced that he was “shocked and shattered by the allegations”, that the victim was “like his child”, and that “she was in Delhi and she came on her own”.
Justice Ganguly continues to hide behind the presumption of innocence and to get vocal support from powerful members of the judicial and legal fraternity since the details of the incident are not in the public domain. It is in these circumstances that I am compelled to make public the details of the incident as outlined in the victim’s sworn affidavit before the Supreme Court committee, which the three-judge committee found prime facie to be established.
I would like to ask Justice Ganguly if this is indeed how he would like his child to be treated?
“When I reached the suite, there were two other persons apart from the judge present there. I was told by the judge that the man was associated with the AIFF (All India Football Federation). The woman was a stenographer. The judge then informed me that the AIFF report had to be submitted the next morning, and asked me to stay at the hotel and work all night. I declined and told him that I had to finish the work quickly, and return to the PG accommodation.
“However, he ignored my repeated protests and asked the AIFF man to enquire whether a room could be booked for me at the same hotel. The AIFF man said that this may not be possible, but upon the insistence of the judge, agreed to consult his superior on the matter. Thereafter, the AIFF man and the woman stenographer left the suite.
“I told the judge that the internet was not working. I asked the judge whether I was at all needed as there was no internet connection, and hence I could not do any web-based research.
Is this how you would like your child to relax, My Lord?
“I felt uneasy, unsettled and disturbed by this suggestion of the judge, and told him that all I wanted to do was to complete the work as soon as possible and return to my PG at the earliest. He, however, brought out a bottle of red wine and handed me a glass. Feeling awkward and unsure, I accepted. This kind of interaction with the judge had never taken place in Kolkata during the period that we worked as RAs (research assistants) with the judge for six months. By now, I was beginning to feel extremely uncomfortable and wanted to leave the place as soon as possible. The judge persisted in making small talk, but I concentrated on completing the typing. I also asked him to arrange transport for me to return to my PG as I wanted to leave at the earliest.
Is this how you would expect your child to be treated by someone old enough to be her grandfather, My Lord?
“At approximately 10 pm, dinner, which had been ordered in the meanwhile by the judge, was served in the room… I moved from the round table where I was working, and seated myself on the long sofa… After I had sat down, the judge came and sat next to me on the same sofa. Both the judge and I started eating. During the dinner, the judge put his hand on my back and thanked me for agreeing to help him. I moved away, clearly indicating to the judge that this physical contact was unwelcome and not proper behaviour on his part.
Is this not what Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, introduced as far back as in 1860 is meant for, My Lord?
“I pushed him away stating that I had to leave immediately. By now it was crystal clear to me that the preceding events were not innocuous in nature, and that he was making unwelcome sexual advances. I quickly picked up my computer and bag, and left the room to take the elevator down. The judge followed me into the elevator, repeatedly saying, ‘Please don’t go’, ‘Did I make you uncomfortable?’, ‘Please don’t leave me, I need your help right now’, and said that the AIFF report needed to be finished. I did not answer the judge anymore. The judge had followed me to the reception. As no car was available, the judge called someone from his cellphone. Soon another man joined us, and I was informed that he was a senior member of the AIFF. The judge informed him that no transport seemed to have been arranged for me, and asked him to handle the matter. When the judge was standing alone with me in the reception, he again repeated his previous words, asking me not to leave and to help him finish the work. I did not respond to him.
I have put forth the details — indeed they have shocked and shattered most of us. And they have prima facie been established by three judges of the Supreme Court, two of whom are incumbent chief justices.
What have you got to say now, My Lord? Does this not call for your resignation from the post of Chair of the West Bengal Human Rights Commission. And if you still refuse to, am I not justified in asking the Prime Minister to request the President of India for your immediate removal from this post, My Lord?