NEW DELHI: Professor Atul
Johri of
Jawaharlal Nehru University was arrested for sexual harassment on Tuesday after he had been questioned by police about charges levelled by nine university students. In court later, Johri was granted bail, though there was some drama when parties to stand surety in eight cases of sexual harassment had to be managed.
The professor claimed in court that he was a victim of false allegations by students he had angered after supporting the recently notified mandatory attendance policy.
Johri had failed to appear before the cops on Monday as directed in the police notice served on him on Saturday. The JNU students and teachers had been protesting for three days at the
Vasant Kunj police station, both to have him arrested as well as to have nine FIRs filed against the single one that police had registered against Johri. On Tuesday, police did add eight more cases based on the complaints of the nine PhD students, who also recorded their statements before a magistrate.
In one of the FIRs, a former student of Johri alleged that she was forced to change her course after the professor delayed the submission of her thesis on resisting his sexual advances. One of the complainants deposed before the magistrate that Johri’s wife had warned them against being present in his office after 6pm and to contact him only for academic purposes. One scholar claimed to have reported the sexual harassment she face to the dean of students and requested him to put her under another supervisor. The request was not granted, she said.
Soon after he approached the police on Tuesday morning, Johri was taken to the R K Puram police station and questioned for around three hours. He could be questioned again, though the court turned down the police request for custodial interrogation. In court, Delhi Police opposed the bail plea, arguing that he was capable of intimidating the complainants since he held various authoritative positions in JNU.
JNU professor cites academic record, claims vendetta
Says Attendance Issue To Blame
While availing bail, Johri cited his academic record and claimed that the allegations were the result of a student vendetta after he sought to warn some students on minimum attendance as required under the new norms of the University Grants Commission, over which JNU students have been agitating. His counsel, Wadhwa, submitted that the allegations against his client were “vague and non-specific” and no complaints had been taken to JNU’s Internal Complaints Committee, the mandated body to handle such cases.
After hearing both sides, metropolitan magistrate Ritu Singh granted the accused conditional bail, though not before a bit of drama over the need to furnish eight sureties of Rs 30,000 in relation to the eight cases registered against Johri. Wadhwa had to seek the court’s time, pointing out that his client had knowledge only of one case against him, not eight. Five lawyers stepped in to stand surety, with the three others being Johri's wife, brotherin-law and a relative.
When the investigating officer submitted that the accused could be required for further custodial interrogation for recovery of call details, the court said it found “no sufficient reasons” to justify the request since “it is the duty of the investigating officer to recover the documents/CDR during the course of investigation and the presence of accused is not required for effecting recovery of CDRs”.
The court also observed that the complainants had recorded their statements under Section 164 of CrPC, leaving no scope for inducement or tampering of evidence. However, the court had five conditions for allowing bail. Johri is to appear in court as and when directed and not commit a similar offence, he would not threaten or influence the complainants to dissuade them from disclosing facts to court, he would not tamper with evidence, would provide all necessary assistance to the investigators and would not leave the country without the court’s permission.
Meanwhile, police also filed an FIR against JNU students’ union leader Geeta Kumari and 17 others for intruding into the Dean of Student’s office and roughing up university officials on March 12.
In his complaint, professor Umesh Ashok Kadam, the dean, told the cops the agitators had occupied his room from 11.30am to 2pm, during which the union president and secretary had pushed him and forced him to sit down. The students had also locked the door and blocked it with a sofa to prevent him leaving his office, he claimed. Police registered an FIR for causing hurt and for criminal intimidation against the students.
