JNU sexual harassment case: Court refuses relief to accused

The Delhi High Court has refused to give any relief to an employee of Jawaharlal Nehru University who was found guilty of sexually harassing a professor of the university by its committee and was asked to take compulsory retirement from the job.

S Raju Aiyer had approached the high court against the single bench order of the high court where he had challenged the punitive measure of compulsory retirement imposed him on account of him being found guilty of sexual harassment by the Gender Sensitisation Committee against Sexual Harassment (GSCASH). The single bench had dismissed his petition.

The person, employed with the university as a personal assistant, contended before the division bench of the high court, ‘The findings of guilt returned by the inquiry committee, disciplinary authority and the appeals committee are based on no evidence and are, thus, perverse.’ He also contended that the registrar of the university is not the competent authority to impose the penalty and, therefore, the order imposing penalty is without jurisdiction and is liable to be set aside.

Aiyer is accused of making frequent calls and harassing the female professor unnecessarily, sending emails with ‘vulgar and filthy’ contents, following and stalking her during her evening walks and creating an overbearing and intimidating atmosphere for her. It was alleged that Aiyer’s actions of ‘passive intimidation’ seriously hampered the victim’s routine.

According to the GSCASH Rules, the complaint was examined by the Complaint Screening Committee and based on the recommendations made by the committee, an inquiry committee was formed to look into the allegations made against Aiyer. 

The said committee concluded that the complainant has proved all the misdeeds of the accused with sufficient evidence and recommended the penalty of compulsory retirement without reduction in any financial benefits. He appealed against the order and but did not get any relief. Later, Aiyer approached the Delhi high court and the single bench dismissed his petition following which he filed an appeal against the single bench order in the high court.

A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice BD Ahmed and Justice Vibhu Bakhru, dismissing the plea, said, ‘The respondent no. 1 — JNU — has followed the GSCASH Rules which are in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Vishakha versus State of Rajasthan. Although, the identities of the witnesses have been concealed in accordance with the GSCASH Rules, nonetheless a copy of their depositions was made available to the appellant and the appellant was given due opportunity to submit questions to the witnesses. The appellant was also given full opportunity to lead evidence in his defence. In the circumstances, the appellant has been afforded adequate opportunity to contest the charges levelled against him and we do not find any error in the decision-making process.

‘We are in agreement with the view of the learned Single Judge that there is no perversity in the findings arrived at by the Inquiry Committee and the Appeals Committee and, thus we find no ground to interfere with the penalty imposed on the appellant,’ said the court.

The high court said that Aiyer’s contention that the registrar was not authorised to impose the penalty on him is also without merit.