The Calcutta High Court has upheld the dismissal of a sexual harassment complaint against Professor (Dr.) Nirmal Kanti Chakraborti, Vice-Chancellor of the National University of Juridical Sciences (NUJS), Kolkata. A division bench comprising Justices Harish Tandon and Prasenjit Biswas found insufficient evidence to support the allegations and concurred with the Local Complaint Committee's (LCC) decision to dismiss the complaint based on statutory time limitations.
Background of the Complaint
On December 26, 2023, a faculty member lodged a complaint accusing Prof. Chakraborti of inappropriate advances occurring between 2019 and April 2023. She alleged that the Vice-Chancellor linked professional benefits to personal interactions. Notably, the complaint was filed shortly after the Executive Council initiated an inquiry into her conduct on December 21, 2023.
Legal Framework and Time Limitations
The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act), mandates that complaints be filed within three months of the last alleged incident, with a possible extension of an additional three months in exceptional circumstances. In this case, the complainant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay, as the last alleged incident occurred in April 2023, and the complaint was filed eight months later.
Court's Analysis and Decision
The court emphasized that the decisions in question were made collectively by the Executive Council, comprising notable academicians and jurists, including judges from the Supreme Court and High Court. It found it improbable that Prof. Chakraborti could have unilaterally influenced the Council's decisions. The bench stated:
"The plea taken by the respondent would have been accepted provided the circumstances contemplated under Section 3 of the POSH Act is related to or connected with the sexual harassment defined under Section 2 (n) of the said Act. As we do not find those circumstances relatable to the sexual harassment but unconnected with it for the reason that such decision were taken by an executive council collectively and not by the appellant alone; even if the appellant being one of the constituent of the executive council but the decisions are taken by the majority and looking upon the constitution of the executive council consisting of notable academicians and the jurists including the judges of the Supreme Court and the High Court, it is improbable that the appellant would exert his position and would manipulate the decision taken by the executive council."
Regarding the delay, the court noted:
"Since the last incident of the sexual harassment is alleged in the complaint to have taken place in the Month of April, 2023 and admittedly the complaint was filed on 26th December, 2023 much beyond the normal period of limitation or for argument sake if the period is extended. Therefore there is no infirmity in the decision of the LCC in dismissing the said complaint. The Single Bench has committed error in setting aside the order of the LCC without adverting to the proposition of law as discussed above."
Implications of the Judgment
This judgment underscores the importance of adhering to statutory timelines in filing complaints under the POSH Act. It also highlights the necessity of providing credible evidence when alleging misconduct, especially against individuals in positions of authority. The court's decision reflects a commitment to due process and the collective decision-making processes within academic institutions.
Conclusion
The Calcutta High Court's ruling in favor of Prof. Chakraborti reaffirms the significance of procedural compliance and evidentiary support in sexual harassment cases. The dismissal of the complaint, based on both the lack of timely filing and insufficient evidence, serves as a precedent for similar cases, emphasizing the judiciary's role in upholding the principles of justice and fairness.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.