REPORT OF THE JUDGES INQUIRY COMMITTEE IN THE MATTER OF:- MOTION FOR REMOVAL OF JUSTICE S.K. GANGELE, JUDGE, MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT INDEX Sl. No. CONTENTS Pages I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. MOTION FOR REMOVAL OF JUSTICE GANGELE AND 2-3 APPOINTMENT OF THE INQUIRY COMMITTEE B. BACKGROUND FACTS 4-5 C. OTHER PROCEEDINGS 5-10 (i) COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED BY THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (ii) WRIT PETITION NO. 792 OF 2014 FILED BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (iii) COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED BY THE SUPREME COURT (iv) NOTICE OF MOTION D. GIST OF AVERMENTS IN THE COMPLAINT 10-13 E. GROUNDS OF MISCONDUCT 13-15 F. STATEMENT OF DEFENCE OF JUSTICE GANGELE 15-18 G. PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE COMMITTEE 18-20 H. REMOVAL OF A JUDGE 20-22 I. STANDARD OF PROOF IN THE IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS 22-27 J. SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND STANDARD OF PROOF 27-30 K. ALLEGATION OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT IF PROVED WOULD 30-32 AMOUNT TO MISBEHAVIOUR L. HIGHER STANDARD OF PROOF REQUIRED 32-34 II. FINDINGS ON CHARGE NO. 1 – RE. CHARGE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 35-68 III. FINDINGS ON CHARGE NO. 2 − RE. CHARGE OF TRANSFER 69-102 IV. FINDINGS ON CHARGE NO.3 – RE. CHARGES OF MISUSE OF POSITION 103-122 USING SUBORDINATE JUDICIARY TO VICTIMIZE THE COMPLAINANT V. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 123 VI. CONCLUSION 124 VII. ANNEXURES - List of Witness and List of Exhibits 125-135 ABBREVIATIONS AND REFERENCES For the purpose of this report, following abbreviations and reference words have been used: Complainant − Ms. ABC-Mrs. Sangeeta Madan; Respondent − Justice S.K. Gangele, Judge, M.P. High Court; JIC.W.− Witnesses examined on behalf of the committee; C.W. − Witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant; R.W. − Witnesses examined on behalf of the respondent; Ex. JIC − Documents summoned and marked by the committee; Ex. C − Documents marked on the side of the complainant; Ex. R − Documents marked on the side of the respondent. Ex. D - Documents not taken on record but given marking only for reference. Part I REPORT OF THE INQUIRY COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 3 OF THE JUDGES INQUIRY ACT, 1968 I. INTRODUCTION: Having concluded its investigation into the grounds on which the removal of Justice S.K. Gangele of the Madhya Pradesh High Court had been sought, the Inquiry Committee - as (re)constituted by Rajya Sabha Notification dated 15th April, 2015 – submits its Report under Section 4(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 [for short ‘the 1968 Act]. Section 4(2) of the 1968 Act reads as under:- “At the conclusion of the investigation, the Committee shall submit its report to the Speaker or, as the case may be, to the Chairman, or where the Committee has been constituted jointly by the Speaker and the Chairman, to both of them, stating therein its findings on each of the charges separately with such observations on the whole case as it thinks fit.” This Report contains a brief account of the proceedings of the Inquiry Committee, pleadings of the parties and a detailed assessment of the facts investigated, alongwith the findings on each of the three charges framed. Findings and conclusion of the Inquiry Committee are recorded in Part II to V. List of witnesses and list of exhibits marked are given in Annexure VI. A. MOTION FOR REMOVAL OF JUSTICE S.K. GANGELE AND APPOINTMENT OF THE INQUIRY COMMITTEE:- 1. On 4th March, 2015, 58 members of the Rajya Sabha gave Notice to the Hon’ble Chairman of a Motion for the removal of Justice S.K. Gangele, a Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Bench at Gwalior under Article 217(1) (c) read with Article 124(4) of the Constitution of India on the following grounds:- (i) Sexual harassment of a woman Additional District and Sessions Judge of Gwalior while being a sitting Judge of the Gwalior Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. (ii) Victimisation of the said Additional District and Sessions Judge for not submitting to his illegal and immoral demands, including, but not limited to, transferring her from Gwalior to Sidhi. (iii) Misusing his position as the Administrative Judge of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh to use the subordinate judiciary to victimize the said Additional District and Sessions Judge. 2. On the said motion being admitted under Section 3(2) of the 1968 Act, the Chairman, Rajya Sabha constituted a Committee –“For the purpose of making an investigation into the grounds on which the removal of Shri Justice S.K. Gangele of Madhya Pradesh High Court is prayed for”, consisting of the following three members:- 1. Hon’ble Shri Justice Vikramjit Sen Supreme Court of India 2. Smt.Justice Manjula Chellur Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court; and 3. Shri K.K. Venugopal Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India th [Rajya Sabha Secretariat Notification dated 15 April, 2015] In partial modification of the Secretariat’s Notification No. S.O. 1015(E) dated 15th April, 2015 under sub-Section (2) of Section 3 of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, on 10th February, 2016, the Chairman, Rajya Sabha, re-constituted the Inquiry Committee by appointing the following three members:- 1. Shri Justice Ranjan Gogoi Supreme Court of India 2. Smt. Justice Manjula Chellur Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court; and 3. Shri K.K. Venugopal Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India [Rajya Sabha Secretariat Notification dated 10th February, 2016] The Inquiry Committee was again re-constituted on 17th March, 2016 by appointing the following three members:- 1. Shri Justice R.F. Nariman Supreme Court of India 2. Smt. Justice Manjula Chellur Chief Justice, Calcutta High Court; and 3. Shri K.K. Venugopal Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India. [Rajya Sabha Secretariat Notification dated 17th March, 2016] Vide Rajya Sabha Notification dated 8th April, 2016, the Inquiry Committee was again reconstituted by appointing the following three members:- 1. Smt. Justice R. Banumathi Supreme Court of India 2. Smt. Justice Manjula Chellur Chief Justice, Calcutta High Court; and 3. Shri K.K. Venugopal Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India. [Rajya Sabha Secretariat Notification dated 8th April, 2016] Being the member chosen under Clause (a) of sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the 1968 Act, Justice R. Banumathi was, and has continued thereafter to act as ‘Presiding Officer of the Inquiry Committee’.[Rule 3 of the 1969 Rules]. One of the Members of the Inquiry Committee (Justice Manjula Chellur) having been appointed as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court on 22nd August, 2016, the Hon’ble Member continued and is hereinafter referred to as the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court instead of Calcutta High Court. 3. By Notification dated 10th July, 2015, the Hon’ble Chairman, Rajya Sabha appointed Shri Arun Chaudhary, IPS(retired) and former Director-General, Sahastra Seema Bal, Government of India as Secretary to the Inquiry Committee constituted under Section 3 of the 1968 Act. The Government of India by Notification dated 30th July, 2015 appointed Shri Sanjay Jain, Additional Solicitor General to assist the Committee (i.e. “to conduct the case against the Judge” as stipulated in Section 3(9) of the Act.). Mr. Arjun Mitra, Advocate was nominated as the counsel to assist Mr. Sanjay Jain, Senior Counsel. B. BACKGROUND FACTS 4. The complainant, Ms. Sangeeta Madan had joined Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Services in 2011 after being selected in Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Services (Direct Recruitment from Bar) Exam, 2011. The complainant is a law graduate from Campus Law Centre, Delhi University, New Delhi. Prior to her recruitment in Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Services, she had practised as an advocate for fifteen years at the courts in Delhi from the year 1995 to 2011. She is married to a Delhi based Architect and has two daughters out of the wedlock. On her being selected in Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Services, on 01.08.2011, she was posted as Additional District and Sessions (trainee) Judge at Gwalior. She shifted to Gwalior along with her two daughters and aged parents. Her husband chose to stay at Delhi and commute to Gwalior every now and then. She successfully completed her training under the guidance of the then District Judge Mr. D.K. Paliwal. On 16.10.2012, she was posted as VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gwalior. In addition to her responsibility as VIIIth ADJ and VIIIth member of MACT, the complainant was assigned responsibility of Special Court dealing with offences against women. On 09.04.2013, the complainant was also appointed the Chairperson of District Vishaka Committee. The complainant was also assigned the additional responsibility of Special Judge under the Madhya Pradesh Dakaiti Aur Vayapaharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam. 5. Respondent, Justice S.K. Gangele was elevated as a High Court Judge, M.P. on 11.10.2004 from the Bar. He was posted at the Indore Bench of the High Court of M.P. where he discharged his judicial responsibilities till May, 2006. In June, 2006 he was transferred to the Gwalior Bench of the High Court and on 25.06.2011 he was nominated to be the Administrative Judge of the Gwalior Bench. He was also Portfolio Judge of the District Gwalior and thus was empowered to supervise the functioning of the District Court, Gwalior. Being the Portfolio Judge, Justice Gangele was in-charge of assessing the work of the complainant. 6. During this time, Justice Gangele is alleged to have sexually harassed the complainant. The complainant has given four specific instances of sexual harassment (i) the 25th Wedding Anniversary celebration of Justice Gangele which was convened on 10th and 11th December, 2013, Ladies Sangeet and main event respectively; (ii) During the month of January, 2014, respondent-Justice Gangele used to send messages through the District Registrar asking complainant to meet Justice Gangele; (iii) wedding ceremony of a Judicial Officer Ms.