Senior Advocate Indira Jaising today objected to Justice AM Khanwilkar hearing the transfer petition in the case relating to the alleged sexual harassment of a law clerk by Justice (Retd.) Swatanter Kumar..The eventful hearing unfolded before a Bench of Justices Kurian Joseph and AM Khanwilkar today in court room 7 of the Supreme Court..When the matter was taken up as item 42, the initial moments were uneventful, as the Court proceeded to dictate an order posting the matter for final hearing..Jaising, however, said that she had a submission to make and went on to raise her objection to Justice Khanwilkar hearing the matter. Her objection was based on the fact that Justice Khanwilkar was a judge of the Bombay High Court, where Justice Swatanter Kumar had served as Chief Justice. She submitted,.“Your lordships may correct me if I am wrong on facts. But Your Lordship was a judge of the Bombay High Court when the Respondent was the Chief Justice there.”.Justice Khanwilkar went on to affirm the same, even stating,.“I had the occasion to share the Bench with him”..Jaising went on to submit that since the very object of the transfer petition is to ensure that the proceedings are not affected by bias, the purpose of transfer petition would be rendered moot if Justice Khanwilkar hears the matter..Jaising then sought permission to mention the matter before Chief Justice of India JS Khehar to take a decision on her objection. Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta objected to the same and said that the issue raised by Jaising regarding Khanwilkar J. hearing the case should be decided by this Bench itself..The Court, however, turned down the same and allowed Jaising to make a mention before the CJI..The transfer petition was filed by the victim of alleged sexual harassment, seeking a transfer of the main case from the Delhi High Court to a state where the accused judge had not worked. It is the petitioner’s case that the accused will be able to influence the proceedings if they are held in Delhi due to his clout in the capital city..Interestingly, the Delhi High Court had restrained the media from reporting about the matter other than covering court proceedings..Image of Justice Khanwilkar taken from here.
Senior Advocate Indira Jaising today objected to Justice AM Khanwilkar hearing the transfer petition in the case relating to the alleged sexual harassment of a law clerk by Justice (Retd.) Swatanter Kumar..The eventful hearing unfolded before a Bench of Justices Kurian Joseph and AM Khanwilkar today in court room 7 of the Supreme Court..When the matter was taken up as item 42, the initial moments were uneventful, as the Court proceeded to dictate an order posting the matter for final hearing..Jaising, however, said that she had a submission to make and went on to raise her objection to Justice Khanwilkar hearing the matter. Her objection was based on the fact that Justice Khanwilkar was a judge of the Bombay High Court, where Justice Swatanter Kumar had served as Chief Justice. She submitted,.“Your lordships may correct me if I am wrong on facts. But Your Lordship was a judge of the Bombay High Court when the Respondent was the Chief Justice there.”.Justice Khanwilkar went on to affirm the same, even stating,.“I had the occasion to share the Bench with him”..Jaising went on to submit that since the very object of the transfer petition is to ensure that the proceedings are not affected by bias, the purpose of transfer petition would be rendered moot if Justice Khanwilkar hears the matter..Jaising then sought permission to mention the matter before Chief Justice of India JS Khehar to take a decision on her objection. Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta objected to the same and said that the issue raised by Jaising regarding Khanwilkar J. hearing the case should be decided by this Bench itself..The Court, however, turned down the same and allowed Jaising to make a mention before the CJI..The transfer petition was filed by the victim of alleged sexual harassment, seeking a transfer of the main case from the Delhi High Court to a state where the accused judge had not worked. It is the petitioner’s case that the accused will be able to influence the proceedings if they are held in Delhi due to his clout in the capital city..Interestingly, the Delhi High Court had restrained the media from reporting about the matter other than covering court proceedings..Image of Justice Khanwilkar taken from here.