New Delhi [India], the West Bengal Raj Bhawan employee, who had alleged sexual harassment by Governor CV Ananda Bose, has approached the Supreme Court challenging the immunity granted to the Governor under Article 361 of the Constitution.
She has asked the high court to decide "whether sexual harassment and abuse form part of the performance or performance of the Governor's duties", to grant him blanket immunity under Article 361 of the Constitution.
Under Article 361(2) of the Constitution, no criminal proceedings may be initiated or continued against the President or Governor of a State before any court during his tenure.
"This court has to decide whether a victim like the petitioner can be left without remedy, the only option being to wait for the accused to resign from his position, a delay that will later be inexplicable during the trial, and will make the entire procedure a mere lip service, without justice being done to the victim," the statement states.
She asserted that such immunity cannot be absolute and she asked the apex court to lay down guidelines and qualifications on the extent of immunity enjoyed by the Governor's office.
"The petitioner feels aggrieved by the sexual advances and harassment carried out by the constitutional authority, the Governor of the State of West Bengal, on the premises of Raj Bhavan itself. However, due to blanket immunity granted under Article 361 of the Constitution, the petitioner is without remedy despite the crime committed against him and is therefore forced to approach this high court directly," the petition states.
The plea argued that the immunity provided for in Article 361 should not be absolute, particularly in cases involving illegal acts or violations of fundamental rights.
She submitted that the immunity cannot impair the powers of the police to investigate the crime or even name the perpetrator in the complaint/FIR, despite specific statements to that effect.
"Such powers cannot be construed as absolute to permit the Governor to carry out acts which are illegal or which go against the root of Part III of the Constitution. Furthermore, such immunity cannot impair the powers of the police to investigate the crime or even naming the perpetrator in the complaint/FIR, despite specific statements to that effect," he added.
He has also sought a thorough investigation into the case by the West Bengal Police and protection and security of her and her family by the West Bengal Police. The woman also requested compensation for the loss of reputation and dignity suffered by her and her family because the state mechanism did not protect her identity.
According to her complaint, the governor had called her on April 24 and May 2 on the false pretext of offering her a better job, only to sexually harass her on the Raj Bhavan premises during working hours.
Although an FIR was registered against the officer on special duty (OSD) and other staff of Raj Bhavan, the Calcutta High Court stayed the proceedings in May.
The FIR accused the OSD and other staff of restricting and pressuring the woman from filing the complaint of alleged sexual harassment against the Governor.
She has asked the high court to decide "whether sexual harassment and abuse form part of the performance or performance of the Governor's duties", to grant him blanket immunity under Article 361 of the Constitution.
Under Article 361(2) of the Constitution, no criminal proceedings may be initiated or continued against the President or Governor of a State before any court during his tenure.
"This court has to decide whether a victim like the petitioner can be left without remedy, the only option being to wait for the accused to resign from his position, a delay that will later be inexplicable during the trial, and will make the entire procedure a mere lip service, without justice being done to the victim," the statement states.
She asserted that such immunity cannot be absolute and she asked the apex court to lay down guidelines and qualifications on the extent of immunity enjoyed by the Governor's office.
"The petitioner feels aggrieved by the sexual advances and harassment carried out by the constitutional authority, the Governor of the State of West Bengal, on the premises of Raj Bhavan itself. However, due to blanket immunity granted under Article 361 of the Constitution, the petitioner is without remedy despite the crime committed against him and is therefore forced to approach this high court directly," the petition states.
The plea argued that the immunity provided for in Article 361 should not be absolute, particularly in cases involving illegal acts or violations of fundamental rights.
She submitted that the immunity cannot impair the powers of the police to investigate the crime or even name the perpetrator in the complaint/FIR, despite specific statements to that effect.
"Such powers cannot be construed as absolute to permit the Governor to carry out acts which are illegal or which go against the root of Part III of the Constitution. Furthermore, such immunity cannot impair the powers of the police to investigate the crime or even naming the perpetrator in the complaint/FIR, despite specific statements to that effect," he added.
He has also sought a thorough investigation into the case by the West Bengal Police and protection and security of her and her family by the West Bengal Police. The woman also requested compensation for the loss of reputation and dignity suffered by her and her family because the state mechanism did not protect her identity.
According to her complaint, the governor had called her on April 24 and May 2 on the false pretext of offering her a better job, only to sexually harass her on the Raj Bhavan premises during working hours.
Although an FIR was registered against the officer on special duty (OSD) and other staff of Raj Bhavan, the Calcutta High Court stayed the proceedings in May.
The FIR accused the OSD and other staff of restricting and pressuring the woman from filing the complaint of alleged sexual harassment against the Governor.
