Last month, when Justice Pushpa Ganediwala – sitting additional judge of the Nagpur bench of the Bombay high court -- ruled that groping breasts while the girl had her clothes on was not a ‘sexual assault’ as there was no skin-to-skin contact, it left people shocked and activists up in protest. There was truce only after a Supreme Court bench, led by Chief Justice of India Sharad Bobde, stayed the verdict.
The Supreme Court collegium also took the unusual step of withdrawing its recommendation to the Centre proposing to elevate her as permanent judge.
But, Justice Ganediwala, 51, who began her career as a lecturer in colleges in Amravati in Maharashtra before she became a judge, had more in store. From ruling that unzipping one’s pants in front of a girl and holding a minor’s hands were not sexual assault to acquitting a man accused of rape by saying he on his own could not have raped as there was no sign of a scuffle, her judgments continued to be talking points.
While child and women’s rights activists alleged that many of the accused punished by trial courts in POCSO cases were granted relief by her while providing “bizarre” explanations and misinterpreting laws governing assault on women and children, a section of lawyers in Nagpur has come out in support of Justice Ganediwala and have decided to send a representation to President Ramnath Kovind and CJI Bobde to reconsider the collegium’s decision.
Lawyers say that the collegium’s decision will make judges apprehensive of taking bold decisions and Bombay HC would be deprived of a promising young judge. Organizations like the National Commission for Women, however, fear that her verdicts will have severe repercussions and have even requested the apex court to stay them.
The judge, however, refused to speak to TOI citing protocol.
When the country was reeling under the effect of Covid-19, Justice Ganediwala, who hails from Paratwada in Amravati district -- along with Justice (retired) Ravi Deshpande -- directed the Maharashtra government in September last year to make sufficient staff and facilities available for treating Covid-19 patients in Nagpur.
The same bench rejected a petition to defer the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) due to the Covid-19 pandemic and floods in Vidarbha.
However, in October, Justice Ganediwala said Covid positive patients were not “untouchables” and directed Mumbai’s government hospitals to ensure treatment of a pregnant woman with Covid-19.
The judge, who restrained producer-director Karan Johar, his firm Dharma Productions, music composer duo Ajay-Atul and Sony Music from airing “Oh Saiyan” song from their film ‘Agneepath’ after a city-based engineer accused them of lifting his copyright song, has had a bright academic record.
After completing BCom, LLB and LLM, she was appointed as district judge in 2007 and worked at civil courts at Mumbai and Nagpur along with family court. She had also cleared NET-SET in the first attempt and worked as lecturer before being appointed as a judge. Later, she was appointed as principal district and sessions’ judge in Nagpur and subsequently, elevated as HC’s registrar-general.
On June 1, 2016, as a principal judge, she allowed a criminal revision application filed by lawyer Satish Uke against former Maharashtra chief minister Devendra Fadnavis. Uke had claimed that Fadnavis had suppressed information about two pending criminal cases against him while filing an affidavit with the Election Commission before contesting assembly polls in 2014.
Justice Ganediwala’s name was in the reckoning for additional judge in HC in 2018 but was not considered following adverse remarks by a few judges that led to SC deferring her appointment. It was during the tenure of former CJI Ranjan Gogoi that she was appointed to the post in 2019.
She was part of many landmark judgments during her stint as HC judge. In 2019, a three-judge bench ruled that parole is limited right available to prisoners, and not merely an administrative decision. The bench had also struck down a provision under Rule 19 (2) of the Prisons Rules under Section 59(5) of the Prisons Act that had barred convicts in state from seeking multiple paroles in a year.
CRIME, PUNISHMENT… & ACQUITTAL
Some of Justice Pushpa Ganediwala’s judgments that became talking points
· Groping breasts not a sexual offence if the girl has her top on as there is no skin-to-skin contact
Judgment led to a public outcry, especially from women and child rights groups
Supreme Court stayed the judgment after attorney general KK Venugopal said order would “set a dangerous precedence”
Maharashtra home minister Anil Deshmukh had said the state government will challenge the order
· Holding hands of a minor and unzipping pants in front of her cannot be defined as ‘sexual assault’
Acquitted the man after victim’s mother accused him of holding hands of her daughter, unzipping his pant in front of her and asking her to join him in bed, when both parents were away from home for work
· If there is no evidence of a scuffle, a man alone cannot commit rape
“It seems highly impossible for a single man to gag a survivor’s mouth, remove her and his clothes, and perform the forcible sexual act, without any scuffle. Had it been a case of forcible intercourse, there would have been a scuffle,” she said while acquitting man accused of raping a 15-year-old.
· Acquitted a rape accused holding that the survivor’s evidence “failed to inspire confidence.” Refused to rely on rape survivor’s testimony
· Demanding money from wife is a “vague term” and can’t be considered harassment as per Section 498A of the IPC
Acquitted a man accused of abetting wife’s suicide. “The evidence is with regard to quarrel between husband and wife where he used to beat her for money. The demand of money is a vague term,” she said.