Read it here at http://jilsblognujs.wordpress.com/2013/11/06/through-my-looking-glass/
Stella James writes:
"Last December was momentous for the feminist movement in the country – almost an entire population seemed to rise up spontaneously against the violence on women, and the injustices of a seemingly apathetic government. In the strange irony of situations that our world is replete with, the protests were the backdrop of my own experience. In Delhi at that time, interning during the winter vacations of my final year in University, I dodged police barricades and fatigue to go to the assistance of a highly reputed, recently retired Supreme Court judge whom I was working under during my penultimate semester. For my supposed diligence, I was rewarded with sexual assault (not physically injurious, but nevertheless violating) from a man old enough to be my grandfather. I won’t go into the gory details, but suffice it to say that long after I’d left the room, the memory remained, in fact, still remains, with me."
So is the lawyer community going to cover this up as well?
Also read http://www.legallyindia.com/201311114099/Interviews/sexual-harassment-supreme-court-is-common
Stella James' internship at the Supreme Court of India and the name of the judge she worked under is a matter of public record both at the Supreme Court and at NUJS. So why is no one naming the judge. He is an accused in a criminal offence - sexual assault.
Any person can be the complainant in a criminal offence, even if the victim chooses not to formally complain.
Why is the Bar Council of Delhi silent.
The victim has identified the assailant by position if not by name.
Stella James has stated that she interned under the assailant in her penultimate semester at NUJS. Therefore this would have been between May and October 2012.
She also states that the sexual assault took place on 24 December 2012, and that the assailant was on 24 December 2012, a 'recently retired Supreme Court judge'.
Swatantra Kumar retired on 19 December 2012 and on 24 December 2012, he was a recently retired SC judge.
The recently retired reference is to recently retired as of 24 December 2012, the date of the sexual assault.
Also, even though the CJI has constituted a three judge committee to look into the issue, this is not the correct and appropriate response in accordance with the rule of law.
The victim has stated that a serious criminal offence (sexual assault) was committed against her person by this retired judge. The accused has been identified by position if not by name.
This calls for the registration of an FIR based upon the complaint and a police investigation.
The three judge committee will have secret deliberations and produce a secret report, which might be used to cover up this crime.
Also for those who are questioning if someone forced the lady to enter the hotel room where the assault occurred, I ask them to instead focus on what explanation does the SC judge have for spending time alone in a hotel room with a female 40 years younger than him.
We should ask him this question.
The lady states she was sexually assaulted and I believe her.
Even if a hypothetical lady had hypothetically consented to have sex with the SC judge, how does this excuse and justify the behavior of a 65 year old married SC judge with four children and his decision to have sex with a young lawyer around 24 years old who had interned with him while he was a sitting SC judge?
Stella James writes:
"Last December was momentous for the feminist movement in the country – almost an entire population seemed to rise up spontaneously against the violence on women, and the injustices of a seemingly apathetic government. In the strange irony of situations that our world is replete with, the protests were the backdrop of my own experience. In Delhi at that time, interning during the winter vacations of my final year in University, I dodged police barricades and fatigue to go to the assistance of a highly reputed, recently retired Supreme Court judge whom I was working under during my penultimate semester. For my supposed diligence, I was rewarded with sexual assault (not physically injurious, but nevertheless violating) from a man old enough to be my grandfather. I won’t go into the gory details, but suffice it to say that long after I’d left the room, the memory remained, in fact, still remains, with me."
So is the lawyer community going to cover this up as well?
Also read http://www.legallyindia.com/201311114099/Interviews/sexual-harassment-supreme-court-is-common
Stella James' internship at the Supreme Court of India and the name of the judge she worked under is a matter of public record both at the Supreme Court and at NUJS. So why is no one naming the judge. He is an accused in a criminal offence - sexual assault.
Any person can be the complainant in a criminal offence, even if the victim chooses not to formally complain.
Why is the Bar Council of Delhi silent.
The victim has identified the assailant by position if not by name.
Stella James has stated that she interned under the assailant in her penultimate semester at NUJS. Therefore this would have been between May and October 2012.
She also states that the sexual assault took place on 24 December 2012, and that the assailant was on 24 December 2012, a 'recently retired Supreme Court judge'.
Swatantra Kumar retired on 19 December 2012 and on 24 December 2012, he was a recently retired SC judge.
The recently retired reference is to recently retired as of 24 December 2012, the date of the sexual assault.
Also, even though the CJI has constituted a three judge committee to look into the issue, this is not the correct and appropriate response in accordance with the rule of law.
The victim has stated that a serious criminal offence (sexual assault) was committed against her person by this retired judge. The accused has been identified by position if not by name.
This calls for the registration of an FIR based upon the complaint and a police investigation.
The three judge committee will have secret deliberations and produce a secret report, which might be used to cover up this crime.
Also for those who are questioning if someone forced the lady to enter the hotel room where the assault occurred, I ask them to instead focus on what explanation does the SC judge have for spending time alone in a hotel room with a female 40 years younger than him.
We should ask him this question.
The lady states she was sexually assaulted and I believe her.
Even if a hypothetical lady had hypothetically consented to have sex with the SC judge, how does this excuse and justify the behavior of a 65 year old married SC judge with four children and his decision to have sex with a young lawyer around 24 years old who had interned with him while he was a sitting SC judge?
No comments:
Post a Comment