news details |
|
|
| Alleged sexual harassment: HC dismisses DySP's plea against former Director Vigilance | | 'Petitioner maligned image of blemished officer, she is habitual of leveling allegations against officers who don't favour her' | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Apr 12: The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by a lady Deputy Superintendent of Police to seek registration of FIR against the two top officials on the charges of "sexual harassment."
Justice Sanjeev Kumar Gupta after hearing the arguments of counsels of the petitioner and the respondents observed: "This petition is not maintainable and is dismissed accordingly."
The lady police officer had filed a petition in the court seeking a direction to register an FIR against the then Director Vigilance and then Deputy Director Prosecution Vigilance Organization Jammu. She had alleged that the officers tried to harass her sexually.
After the petition was filed the then Director Vigilance in his reply had stated that the writ has been filed as counterblast proceedings just to put undue pressure upon him as well as to malign and defame his clear service career.
He had stated the allegations leveled in the writ petition are totally baseless and completely wrong. While contesting her claim the respondent (then Director Vigilance) had dismissed her allegations stating that she approached him in the month of November, 2015 but there was no occasion to approach him as during the month of November, 2015 nothing regarding the verification being conducted on her complaint was pending before him or in the Central Office of Vigilance Organization.
The respondents counsel informed the court that service profile of his client is unblemished and he has been decorated with various prestigious police and service medals.
The lady DySP had even named the officer in "Me-too campaign" to defame him and malign his image, the counsel had argued.
The lawyer of the accused officer informed the court that the petitioner even used media to defame him. A news item under heading 'Cop demands flesh to register FIR' appeared in a local daily and on the same day the matter was got enquired into by the IGP, Jammu Zone through Dy.SP Hqrs, Jammu. The detailed report was forwarded by the IGP, Jammu to the PHQ on 08.04.2017 in which it was observed that the allegations leveled by the petitioner were not substantiated during the course of enquiry. It was stated in the objections that the petitioner herein had lodged a complaint before the Vigilance Organization against one Zakir Hussaina and Ashiq Hussain alleging therein that they had encroached upon the Nallah/Waterbody by raising construction thereon and a false case bearing FIR No.100/2012 has been registered against her on the basis of the complaint lodged by the said persons and on the basis of said complaint verification bearing 22/2013 was registered by Vigilance Organization which was being monitored by the State Vigilance Commission and during the pendency of said verification, the petitioner approached the State Vigilance Commission vide application dated 16.08.2016 stating therein that enquiry officers have recommended registration of case against the erring officials and land grabbers but the Deputy Director Prosecution Vigilance and Director Vigilance have started exploiting the petitioner herein by demanding undue favour, which were refused to them. The said complaint was forwarded by the Vigilance Commission to the Director Vigilance with the direction to bring the enquiry to its logical conclusion. The verification was concluded and report was submitted to the Vigilance Commission as well as to the Anti Corruption Court, Jammu on 02.01.2017; that an application dated 16.08.2016 submitted by the petitioner before the State Vigilance Commission does not make a mention of sexual harassment as published in the news item; that earlier also similar allegations of harassment were leveled by the petitioner against the police officials associated with the investigation of case FIR No.100/2012 before the State Women Commission, which indicate that she is habitual of leveling allegations against the officers who do not favour her; a similar complaint was also lodged by the petitioner before the State Human Rights Commission to which a detailed report was submitted by PHQ stating therein that the land in question was property of Zakir Hussain and Ashiq Hussain and investigation conducted had prima facie established that the petitioner herein and her PSOs had demolished the old erected wall of the said land. It has further been stated that as per the report of Director Land Records the petitioner did not cooperate with the Committee headed by Director Land Records, Jammu and did not allow them to conduct measurement of the land falling with her compound and did not even provide the requisite documents to the SDM. The Enquiry Officer (Dy.SP Hqrs Jammu) has specifically mentioned as under:
"....... Next day she submitted her statement that had no clear mention of sexual abuse but was more of general in nature . But after one day she suddenly landed in the reader section of undersigned in the absence of undersigned and asked for her statement to read. After reading the statement she forcibly caught hold of it and took it along with her, leaving another statement in the office. However, both the entries of her visit are available in the record of office of undersigned...."
From perusal of the complaint enclosed in the petition when it was compared with the original complaint, it was found that there is contradiction and difference between both the complaints. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
