Flirting, not an acceptable conduct on part of a Judge- SC

The Apex Court refused to entertain a petition filed by former District Judge of Madhya Pradesh HC which challenged the disciplinary proceedings initiated by Madhya Pradesh HC.

The disciplinary proceedings were initiated in furtherance of sexual harassment allegations by a junior judicial officer.

The counsel representing Madhya Pradesh HC read out the WhatsApp messages sent by the petitioner and submitted that such behaviour contributes to in-conducive working environment.

The bench agreed to the counsel’s submission and stated that “flirting with a junior officer is not acceptable from a judge.”

The counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that the lady officer has withdrawn the complaint filed under Prevention of Sexual Harassment Act and thus the disciplinary proceedings stand not maintainable.

The bench stated that proceedings under the Act and departmental enquiry conducted by the High Court are independent of each other and latter has the right to conduct the proceedings.

The bench also observed that the lady officer might have withdrawn the complaint due to some kind of embarrassment, and High Court, being a concerned authority, is duty-bound to conduct the departmental inquiry.

The counsel appearing for Madhya Pradesh HC stated that petitioner admitted sending the messages and chose not to challenge the proceedings when the charge-sheet was filed.

The petitioner raised questions on the enquiry report and pointed out fundamental flaws in it which were denied by the apex court.

The bench was also of the view that the messages are offensive and inappropriate, and that right to conduct departmental enquiry is an inherent right of employer which could not be questioned.

The bench also repudiated the petitioner’s submission that the complaint was brought up when the petitioner’s name was being considered for elevation as a HC judge.

Subsequently, the bench suggested the counsel to withdraw the petition and contest the disciplinary proceedings, to which the counsel sought for a week’s adjournment.