New Delhi: The three-member in-house committee of the Supreme Court has found no substance in the sexual harassment allegations against Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi. (Also read: Muzaffarpur Shelter Home Case: CBI Tells SC 11 Girls Were Murdered)Also Read - Postpone NEET PG 2022: Students File Fresh Plea in SC, Say Internship Formality Not Completed
A notice by the office of Supreme Court Secretary-General also said that the report of the committee constituted as part of the in-house procedure was not liable to be made public. Also Read - 'Law Will Take its Own Course': Former CJI Ranjan Gogoi as Opposition Parties Continue to Submit Privilege Notices Against Him in RS
Earlier, the former Supreme Court employee, who had accused the CJI of sexual harassment had refused to appear before the panel and said, “I felt I was not likely to get justice from this committee and so I am no longer participating in the 3 Judge Committee proceedings,” Also Read - BREAKING: TMC MP Moves Privilege Motion Against Former CJI Ranjan Gogoi
The 35-year-old woman, said in a letter, a day after the panel, led by Justice SA Bobde, held its third in-chamber last week. The woman also alleged that she had been followed by motorcycles, after she came out of the in-house committee hearing. “After I left the first Committee hearing on the first day, I saw that the car I travelling by was being followed by two men on a motorcycle whose partial number I was able to note,” the woman wrote.
Meanwhile, also on Monday, the Supreme Court said that a plea seeking direction to CBI to lodge an FIR into an alleged conspiracy to fix the CJI in a “concocted, false sexual harassment” case will be heard in due course.
Since the matter was mentioned for urgent listing before a bench comprising Justices S A Bobde and S Abdul Nazeer, the bench asked, “What is the urgency? You have filed it and it will come up for hearing.”
“It will be listed in due course,” it said. The petitioner’s advocate later told the bench that he was not seeking an urgent listing of the matter. When the advocate said his plea be listed for hearing before the same bench which had dealt with a lawyer’s affidavit claiming a larger conspiracy to frame the CJI, Justice Bobde said, “We will see when it will be listed and before whom.”