New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice and also sought assistance from the Attorney General on a petition moved filed by a woman staff member of the West Bengal Raj Bhavan, against the immunity granted to the governor under Article 361. The petitioner has cited her allegations of sexual harassment against Governor CV Ananda Bose.
Senior advocate Shyam Divan, represented the petitioner before a bench led by Chief Justice of India and comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra. Divan contended that there cannot be and there is no probe and the evidence has to be gathered now and it cannot be deferred indefinitely. The bench said the Union of India has not been made a party in the petition. Divan said the Union of India will be made a party.
The bench, in its order, noted that the petition raises questions regarding the protection granted to the governor under Article 361: no criminal proceedings shall be constituted or continued against the governor of a state during his term of office.
The bench granted the liberty to the petitioner to implead the Union of India in the petition and issued notice to the central government and the state government.
The CJI requested the Attorney General for India to assist the court in the matter. According to Article 361 (2) of the Constitution, no criminal proceedings can be instituted or continued against the President, or the Governor of a state, in any court during their term of office.
The petitioner said she is moving the apex court invoking its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 32, Constitution, as she is aggrieved by the sexual advances/harassment made by the constitutional authority –Governor, State of West Bengal in the premises of Raj Bhavan itself. The plea contended that due to the blanket immunity bestowed under Article 361, Constitution, the petitioner is left remediless, and therefore she is constrained to approach the apex court directly.
Citing Article 361, the plea contended that such powers cannot be understood to be absolute so as to enable the Governor to do acts which are illegal or which strike at the root of Part III of the Constitution. The plea said the immunity cannot impair the police’s powers to investigate the offence or even name the perpetrator in the complaint/FIR, despite specific averments to that effect.
The petitioner urged the apex court to frame guidelines and qualifications to the extent the immunity given under Article 361 can be exercised by the office of the Governor.
