In a recent development, allegations of sexual harassment surfaced against the Governor of West Bengal, sparking widespread concern and scrutiny. Many are now debating the legal implications, specifically focusing on whether Article 361 of the Constitution, which grants immunity to Governors for their official actions, extends to matters of personal misconduct such as this.
Calcutta: During the Lok Sabha Election, West Bengal’s Trinamool Congress government alleged that governor CV Ananda Bose committed sexual harassment, an accusation he strongly refuted. The conflict between the TMC and the Governor’s office intensified, marking a troubling phase in state politics.
What are the specifics of the allegation against the governor? A female staff member of Raj Bhavan, employed since 2019 and residing in the residential quarters at the Governor’s House, claims that Bose “inappropriately touched” her. The issue surfaced when she reported to the police within the Governor’s House, alleging that Bose molested her.
Read Also: Sandeshkhali Row | West Bengal moves SC challenging ,of probe to CBI
In her statement, the complainant detailed two instances of alleged sexual harassment. She explained,
“On April 19, the Governor requested me to spare some time and meet him with my CV.”
On a subsequent occasion, she recounted,
“Around 12:45 pm on April 24, he summoned me to his office. After a brief discussion, he touched me. I was able to quickly exit the office. He called me again on May 2. Fearing further inappropriate behaviour, I brought my supervisor with me to the conference room. After some work-related conversation, he asked my supervisor to leave and continued to talk, bringing up the topic of my promotion. He mentioned he would call me later that night and instructed me not to share this with anyone. When I declined, he attempted to touch me again. I objected and left the room.”
Deputy Commissioner of Central Division, Indira Mukherjee, verified the filing of the complaint, stating,
“A complaint was registered around 5 pm at the police outpost and was then sent to Hare Street police station. The complaint has been made against His Excellency the Governor. An investigation is currently underway.”
The party led by Mamata Banerjee charged Bose with dishonoring Raj Bhavan.
In a message on X, the TMC stated,
“It is both shocking and inconceivable! Raj Bhavan, which stands as a symbol of our constitutional values, has been defiled. Just hours before Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s scheduled overnight stay at Raj Bhavan, a woman claims to have been molested by the Governor under the guise of offering her a job.”
The governor prohibited police access to the Raj Bhavan, alleging an unauthorized, illegitimate, and politically motivated “investigation” aimed at appeasing political figures during elections, further intensifying the conflict with the state administration.
Raj Bhavan issued a statement, saying,
“The Attorney General of India has been consulted for guidance on further legal actions against the minister. Additionally, the Honorable Governor has prohibited police entry into the Raj Bhavan premises under the pretext of carrying out unauthorized, illegitimate, and sham investigations, which are politically motivated during the election period.”
Article 361 grants immunity to the President and Governor, stating that they are not subject to legal proceedings for actions taken in the exercise of their official powers and duties. This includes acts performed or purportedly performed in the execution of these powers and duties, making them immune from legal accountability before any court.
The rule states,
“During their terms, no criminal actions can be launched or pursued against the President, or the Governor of a State, in any court. Furthermore, no court is permitted to issue orders for the arrest or imprisonment of the President, or the Governor of a State, while they are in office.”
In the ground breaking 2006 judgment of Rameshwar Prasad v Union of India, the Supreme Court established that,
“According to legal doctrine, the Governor is afforded absolute immunity, even when facing “accusations of personal malice.”
The Supreme Court stated,
“The Governor is not accountable to any court for the exercise and fulfilment of the powers and responsibilities of the office or for any action taken or purportedly taken by the Governor in the exercise and fulfilment of those powers and responsibilities,”
In 2017, the Supreme Court permitted the initiation of new charges of criminal conspiracy against BJP leaders LK Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, and Uma Bharti for their roles in the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition. The case did not proceed against the former Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Kalyan Singh, as he serving as the Governor of Rajasthan at the time. The Supreme Court stated that Kalyan Singh, as the Governor of Rajasthan, is “entitled” to immunity under Article 361 throughout his tenure.
Read Also: West Bengal Moves Supreme Court: “Why 24k School Job Appointments Were Cancelled?”
The court also indicated that the Court of Sessions would establish charges and proceed against him “as soon as he ceases to be Governor.”
The then Meghalaya Governor V Shanmuganathan resigned in 2017 after the Centre’s encouragement, amidst accusations of sexual harassment by Raj Bhavan staff. Similarly, in 2009, Andhra Pradesh Governor ND Tiwari resigned citing health reasons, following an alleged scandal involving misconduct at Raj Bhavan.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
