Summary:
The court then posted the pleas to March 6 for reporting compliance. CHENNAI: Justice S M Subramaniam of the Madras high court has become the first judge in the country to voluntarily go under continuous CCTV glare, directing cameras to be installed in his chamber and "strongly" recommending that the official chambers of all higher officials in the state be secured similarly to avoid instances of sexual harassment and safeguard the interests of women employees.Quoting Mahatma Gandhi, who said, “An ounce of practice is worth more than tonnes of preaching,” Justice Subramaniam said, “The police department is preaching with a responsibility that all the residents, apartment owners, traders and others shall install CCTV cameras in their respective premises, to enable police to nab offenders. However, another ICC was reconstituted in the chairmanship of Srilakshmi Prasad who is in the rank of DGP,” he pointed out.The judge then confirmed the constitution of an internal complaints committee headed by ADGP Srilakshmi Prasad and said that the committee shall proceed with the inquiry following procedures under the Sexual Harassment Act.The court directed the chief secretary to initiate further actions against Murugan under the relevant service rules, which were necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case and with reference to the complaint made by the woman SP dated August 4, 2018. This being the stand of the department, what about the offenders and black sheep in the chambers and office rooms of the department — what measures have been taken to nab them?”The judge made the observations while vacating the stay against a CB-CID probe into a sexual harassment complaint made by a woman superintendent of police against DVAC joint director S Murugan.Pulling up the DVAC for not taking immediate action on the complaint with due seriousness, the judge said, at the first instance, the Internal Complaints Committee was constituted under the chairmanship of A Radhika, deputy director, DVAC.It was a mockery on the part of the authorities concerned to appoint an officer of the rank of deputy director of DVAC as the presiding officer to conduct an inquiry against the joint director of the same department.“One can easily visualize that such an exercise was done either to frustrate the inquiry or to make a compromise on the complaint..