Explained: Case of Madhya Pradesh judicial officer who accused HC judge

The complainant was an Additional District and Sessions Judge in Gwalior at the time when Justice Gangele was also the Administrative Judge in the Gwalior Bench of the MP High Court. Gangele was also the Portfolio Judge of Gwalior district and was therefore empowered to supervise the functioning of the District Court, Gwalior. As the Portfolio Judge, he was also in charge of assessing the work of the complainant. It was during this period that he is alleged to have sexually harassed her.

The complainant alleged she was transferred to Sidhi on July 8, 2014, when she resisted the harassment, and contended that this was in violation of the transfer policy of MP High Court. She added her representation seeking eight months extension as her daughter, who was in Class 12 had to appear in the board exams was rejected.

Following this, she resigned from service on July 15, 2014, and her resignation was accepted on July 17, 2014.

What happened after her resignation?

She then complained to the Chief Justice of India who called for remarks from the Chief Justice of Madhya Pradesh High Court. The MP high court Chief Justice then constituted a two-member committee comprising two senior sitting HC Judges to inquire into the matter and submit a report. Though the committee issued notice to the woman official to appear before it, the complainant in her reply sought clarification on the authority of law under which the panel was constituted and raised questions about the fairness of the inquiry to be conducted by it.

The complainant also filed a petition before the SC challenging the constitution of the in-house committee. The apex court disposed of the petition finding fault in the procedure followed by the HC Chief Justice. The CJI then constituted an in-house committee, which concluded that the materials were insufficient to establish the charges.

Proceedings in Rajya Sabha

On March 17, 2015, 58 members of the Rajya Sabha gave notice to the then Chairman Hamid Ansari of a Motion for the removal of Justice Gangele on misconduct charges. Admitting the motion, the Chairman on April 8, 2016, set up a committee comprising then SC judge Justice R. Banumathi, Justice Manjula Chellu, who was the then Calcutta HC Chief Justice, and Senior Advocate K K Venugopal, who is currently the Attorney General for India, to investigate the allegations.

The committee examined the complainant, the HC judge and all those concerned. Justice Gangele categorically denied the allegations of sexual harassment levelled against him by the complainant.

In its report, the committee said that the four instances of sexual harassment alleged by the complainant “are not proved beyond reasonable doubt”. On her transfer, the committee said it “is of the view that there has been a total lack of human face in the transfer” and that “in the interest of justice, the complainant has to be reinstated back in the service, in case, if the complainant intends to re-join service”.

Regarding her allegations of staff harassment by not giving her a peon, stenographer etc, the committee said the actions complained of “form part of routine district administration/exercise of supervisory power by the High Court under Article 235 of the Constitution of India. The allegation that the respondent judge was misusing his position by using the subordinate judiciary to victimize the complainant in discharge of her duties as judicial officer, is not proved”.

Proceedings in SC

On February 13, 2019, the Supreme Court asked the High Court to reconsider the issue of reinstatement of the complainant. But the full court of the High Court rejected the said representation in a meeting on February 15, 2019.

The SC had also suggested that she be reinstated and sent on deputation outside the state or she could be adjusted in some other state, but this did not happen either.

Newsletter | Click to get the day’s best explainers in your inbox