Female Lawyer Accuses Clerk Of Molesting Her Inside Calcutta High Court Elevator
A female lawyer at the Calcutta High Court has accused a male clerk of molesting her inside an elevator at the Calcutta High Court on Monday morning.According to reports, the lawyer stated that she was molested by the accused- a clerk working for an advocate when she was alone in the elevator with him.It was stated that the Group-D employee had also made advances on her before, promising...
A female lawyer at the Calcutta High Court has accused a male clerk of molesting her inside an elevator at the Calcutta High Court on Monday morning.
According to reports, the lawyer stated that she was molested by the accused- a clerk working for an advocate when she was alone in the elevator with him.
It was stated that the Group-D employee had also made advances on her before, promising her favours in the cases being handled by her.
It is stated that the woman informed her colleagues who confronted the accused, and subsequently lodged a case at the local police station which is stated to be investigating the matter under the relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Notably, last year, a division bench of the High Court dismissed a PIL filed seeking to implement provisions of the Prevention of Sexual Harassment in the Workplace (PoSH) Act in the High Court premises.
"We find the writ petition is absolutely premature. The prayer number A is founded on a reply obtained by the petitioner pursuant to a query raised under the RTI Act, and the petitioner prays for a show cause notice to the High Court at Calcutta on the contradictions in the RTI reply. From the petition we find, the petitioner who is a practising advocate, has failed to even make a representation to the Registry, which ought to have been done since the petitioner claims to be practising in this Court since 2019. A writ of mandamus can only be issued when there has been inaction by authorities, or a genuine representation is not acted on in accordance with law. The petitioner has not made any such representation and it appears that the writ petition is founded on replies obtained under the RTI Act. Therefore, we find that the writ petition is absolutely premature and cannot be entertained. However, it shall be open to the petitioner to make appropriate representation before the concerned forum," a division bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya had said.