HC orders SIT probe into RDVV VC harassment case, slams lax inquiry
Jabalpur: Taking serious note of the negligence in the ongoing investigation of a
filed against the vice chancellor of Rani Durgavati Vishwavidyalaya (RDVV), the MP high court has ordered the formation of a three-member special investigation team (SIT) of senior IPS officers to probe the case.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
A high court bench of Justice Vishal Mishra ordered that the committee be chaired by an IG-rank officer and include a female officer of SP rank. No one from the Jabalpur district will be included in the committee. The single bench instructed the state govt to form the SIT within three days.
It is noteworthy that a female officer posted at the Jabalpur-based university filed a complaint of workplace sexual harassment against Vice-Chancellor Rajesh Kumar Verma.
Due to inaction on the complaint, the aggrieved female officer approached the high court.
The petition stated that on Nov 21, 2024, during a meeting, the vice-chancellor made indecent gestures in his office. He made inappropriate comments and gestures in front of everyone. She requested the CCTV footage from the vice-chancellor's office on the day of the incident under the Right to Information Act, but it was not provided.
During the hearing, the govt informed the single bench that a six-member committee was formed for the investigation, and the CCTV footage from the day of the incident was preserved. However, during the hearing, it was revealed to the bench that the university administration did not present the CCTV footage from the day of the incident to the
.
The university administration informed the committee that the footage could not be downloaded due to a malfunction in the CCTV.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
The single bench ordered the district collector to have the cameras at the university examined by forensic and technical experts.
Upon reviewing the report submitted by the district collector, the single bench found no mention of whether the CCTV camera in the vice-chancellor's room was operational on the day of the incident.
The single bench instructed the committee to present an affidavit examining the seized documents, witness statements, and other elements related to the investigation.
The district collector expressed dissatisfaction with the investigation in the submitted affidavit. The single bench found that the investigation committee showed no interest in gathering evidence during the inquiry.
Despite a serious complaint of workplace sexual harassment by a female employee, the respondent officers acted arbitrarily without conducting a proper investigation.
The petitioner's lawyer argued that the accused was an influential person with high political connections. The court gave the officers an opportunity to conduct a proper investigation, but the submitted report was unsatisfactory.
Advocate Alok Bagrecha represented the petitioner.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
37 minutes ago
- The Print
India's all-party delegations show a problem with our embassies
Governments regularly send foreign affairs ministers or senior officials to convey important and special messages. But the use of all-party parliamentary delegations is a rare practice in diplomacy. I cannot recall any recent example of a country taking such a step. That such delegations were needed to convey India's position on terrorism reflects the limitations of Indian missions abroad in performing this task effectively. My view is that the government was compelled to send these delegations because Indian missions abroad are unable to aggressively promote India's national interests. The decision of the Modi government to send all-party parliamentary delegations to different countries for mobilising support against terrorism, following the ceasefire with Pakistan, has attracted significant public attention. As these delegations are reaching various countries, questions are being raised about why such a step was necessary in the first place. This situation can be attributed to two interrelated factors. One is that successive governments have failed to carry out necessary reforms in the Indian missions abroad. The other is that officials working in Indian embassies get little public recognition back home, which impacts their performance. As a result, the government has to resort to temporary mechanisms such as sending all-party delegations. However, the long-term solution lies in the structural reform of India's missions abroad. Also Read: Sanskrit to satellites, embassies in Delhi are using culture to show ties, get close to India Decolonising the structure of Indian embassies The Indian missions abroad, called high commissions in Commonwealth countries and embassies in others, are primarily responsible for conveying the message of the Indian government. Increasing the efficiency of these missions is crucial, but unfortunately, successive governments have not paid any attention in this regard. Reforms are needed in two directions—decolonisation of the structure of Indian embassies, and the promotion of active over passive leadership. First, the structure of Indian embassies. For example, the Indian High Commission in London still seems to be organised along colonial lines. Presently, six of its officials are designated as ministers. They are minister (counsellor), minister (audit), minister (economic), minister (coordination), and minister (Nehru Centre). Interestingly, the designation of minister is not used by the Indian High Commissions in Australia, New Zealand, or Canada. And only India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh have this designation in their London-based high commissions. This practice appears to have been inherited from the office of the Secretary of India during colonial rule. While the positions of secretary and deputy secretary may have been replaced with High Commissioner and Deputy High Commissioner, the remaining designations are unchanged. The designation of minister also creates confusion when Union or state ministers officially visit London. Usually, the embassy 'ministers' receive and accompany them. It causes great confusion for those unfamiliar with the bureaucratic hierarchy. The second issue relates to leadership style. The government needs to ensure that Indian embassies show active rather than passive leadership. Presently, embassies tend to act only after receiving instructions from the government, and their engagement remains very formal. However, they need to be encouraged to engage with the Indian diaspora and other stakeholders informally. Based on my six years of experience in London, I have noticed that purely bureaucratic appointments reduce such engagement. Therefore, the government needs to diversify its officials in Indian missions. It should incorporate professors, journalists, writers, and other young leaders into the pool. I have found, for instance, that the appointment of Amish Tripathi as the Chair of the Nehru Centre in London significantly increased social activities. The centre acts as the cultural wing of the Indian High Commission in London, and it emerged as a premier institution engaged in India's cultural interface with the UK. Coming from a literary background, Tripathi, who served until October 2023, did not concern himself with bureaucratic protocols and met people both formally and informally. This led to a rise in cultural activities and social gatherings at the Nehru Centre. The appointment of diverse professionals in Indian missions abroad is needed for two further reasons. First, the missions increasingly need to engage with the Indian diaspora, which is itself diverse in terms of region, ideology, caste, and profession. A broader mix of professionals in missions will improve outreach. Second, the appointment of diverse professionals will provide them with exposure to foreign policy and diplomacy, which would be beneficial for developing future leaders. Also Read: Countering Pakistan isn't India's only challenge. We need doctrinal clarity on China factor The problem of invisibility The lack of public recognition for the good work done in Indian embassies also discourages officials from showing active leadership. For example, the current Indian High Commissioner in London, Vikram Doraiswami, is the most active one I have seen in comparison with his predecessors. He frequently meets people and actively participates in community events. Yet most Indians would not know his name. Similarly, the security officer of the Commission, Kiran Bhosale, was injured while protecting the Tricolour during a Khalistan protest in 2023. Yet this news found no space in the media. All of these point to a lack of recognition for the work being done in the Indian mission. This too acts as a disincentive to active leadership. To sum up, decolonising Indian missions, promoting active leadership through professional diversification, and increasing recognition for officials would go a long way in making embassies better equipped to fulfil the role they were set up for. Arvind Kumar is a Visiting Lecturer in Politics & International Relations at the University of Hertfordshire, UK. He tweets @arvind_kumar__. Views are personal. (Edited by Asavari Singh)
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
How to talk politics at work when you disagree
Since the Pahalgam terror attack in Kashmir last month, Ishaan Kanoi has been discussing politics in his office more than ever. Though Kanoi, 38, usually maintains a 'neutral" stance at work, the recent tension between India and Pakistan forced him to 'break the code". 'I couldn't help myself if anyone spoke against India," says the Mumbai-based sales professional at an IT company. 'While I usually refrain from contributing to political conversations at work, it felt like the right step to defend my country now. It resulted in several arguments with my colleagues." Unlike Kanoi, Ananya Banerjee has always been vocal about her political ideologies at work. In recent weeks, though, her views have resulted in several confrontations, impacting her relationship with co-workers. She has regrets about this. 'There have been several repercussions—a former manager blocked me on social media and started to ignore me at work. He was otherwise very appreciative of my achievements but we now don't see eye to eye. Some other colleagues also choose to ignore me," says Delhi-based Banerjee, 41, who works as a content head at an advertising agency. Also read: The power of hitting pause during a workday Given the political upheaval across the world, it's becoming harder to keep politics out of the workplace. Organisations and employees are embedded in the larger socio-political structure of the country, so they are impacted by it as well, says Ankita Tandon, associate professor (organisational behaviour and human resources), International Management Institute, Delhi. When people come to work, they bring their whole selves: their professional expertise, their personality, their beliefs, their mental models, and their opinions, she adds. 'Political discussions are a kind of social interaction. Organisations cannot stop people from engaging in social and political discussions as it might be looked upon as curtailing the right to free speech." Discussing politics at work, however, can be a double-edged sword. While it can serve as an ice-breaker, it can also cause damage. The 2024 State of the Global Workplace Report by analytics and advisory company Gallup, which surveyed 10,000 employees, suggests the same. About 14% of employees in the report claim having political discussions with co-workers has helped them feel included. But 12% say political conversations at work have made them feel uncomfortable. 'In this scenario, organisations can set guidelines for such discussions to happen within certain boundaries," suggests Tandon. 'Us Versus Them' Talk With social media providing a constant stream of political news and commentary, it's natural that employees will bring their political views into the office, says Vigil Thomas, head of human resources at Bengaluru-based digital payments startup, ToneTag. There's another caveat—unchecked political opinions or the spread of misinformation can subtly but significantly, erode team dynamics. 'What starts as a casual remark or a shared link can quickly spiral into deeper issues that affect trust, collaboration and morale," says Thomas. 'When employees share biased or inaccurate political content, it can damage their credibility." Also read: Can AI help employees be happier at work? Heated political discussions also disrupt focus. Meetings can veer off track, time is lost debating unrelated topics, and productivity suffers. Over time, teams may begin to polarise, forming cliques based on ideological alignment. This creates an 'us versus them" environment, making some employees feel excluded and less likely to contribute. So, how can HR professionals and managers manage political discourse in a way that maintains a professional, productive and respectful work environment? 'While fostering an inclusive, open environment where employees can freely express themselves is essential, the workplace must also be a space where focus remains on collaboration, performance and shared goals," says Thomas. 'Disagreements over political views often escalate into personal conflicts." Tandon agrees, adding that verbalisation of strong political opinions and discussion of information circulating on social media can easily escalate into conflicts and confrontations at work. Once that happens, interpersonal relationships can get affected which, in turn, can reflect in changes in team dynamics and team. The involved employees may form negative opinions and lack trust in each other, which is likely to spill over into work. 'There is a strong relationship between interpersonal relationships at work and team cohesion, happiness, satisfaction and performance," says Tandon. Setting an Example Establishing a strong foundation starts with setting clear guidelines about workplace behaviour during the onboarding process, suggests Thomas. 'Emphasise the importance of maintaining respect for differing views while making it clear that political discussions should not overshadow professional responsibilities," he adds. 'Make sure these expectations are reinforced regularly." The goal is not to silence voices but encourage conversations where diverse perspectives are respected, says Sahil Sharma, global chief human resource officer at RateGain, a global provider of AI-powered travel and hospitality SaaS solutions. 'The senior leadership must set the tone that the goal is understanding, not persuading. Provide team members with resources on empathetic listening and constructive communication," he adds. Also read: Be goal-oriented, not task-focused, to get ahead at work In industries where political discourse may be part of the work, such as public policy, social justice, or media, creating designated spaces for employees to express their views is a smart decision. Thomas says, 'These discussions should be voluntary, structured, and moderated to ensure they remain respectful and productive." Organisations must also communicate to their staff that all political opinions are welcome during interpersonal interactions, says Tandon. However, employees must be willing to be sensitive towards each other's viewpoints and emotions, and know when to de-escalate discussions before they become too heated. 'Organisations must firmly communicate that political opinions should not be entertained during work related discussions," she adds. In any case, leaders and managers should model the right behaviour by staying neutral about politically sensitive topics at work, focusing conversations on shared goals and business objectives rather than personal beliefs, suggests Sharma. 'Besides, leaders must consider hosting short awareness sessions on digital literacy and responsible information sharing to prevent the spread of fake news," he says. There must also be a mediation mechanism for conflict resolution should any differences in personal opinions lead to interpersonal conflicts. 'Plus, organisations must create clear guidelines regarding consequences for employees who let interpersonal differences of political opinions seep into workplace coordination and productivity," says Tandon. Lastly, regular training and workshops to foster team trust, open communication and team cooperation across hierarchies can help maintain a positive team environment. 'Proactive policies and respectful boundaries are essential to keep the workplace focused, inclusive and collaborative," says Thomas. Write to us at feedback@ Also read: Do Gen Z workers need etiquette training?
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
Stay open: Customs mustn't let its green channel turn red
As reported, the government is working on a strategy to take down an illicit but sophisticated network of 'import carriers' at Indian air and seaports—a gang of smugglers, i.e., masquerading as regular tourists. Of late, there have been many reports of duty-evasion cases. Among those that caught public attention, a Kannada actor was stopped at Bengaluru airport allegedly trying to smuggle in more than 14kg of gold in March. Authorities not only have the usual suspects under watch, but also people with 'special privileges' at airports. 'Import carriers' are suspected of sneaking in illegal quantities of gold, electronic gadgets and even Chinese toys, which face high tariff and quality barriers. So far, so usual. No one wants smugglers running rings around customs and police, who must enforce the law. But it would help to know exactly how widespread this problem is. Data should be made public so that sporadic slip-throughs do not become a basis for tighter policy. Also Read: Mint Quick Edit | Ranya Rao arrest: Let gold enter India duty-free The measures being discussed reportedly include making customs declarations more detailed, placing a cap on how often passengers—especially frequent flyers from trade hubs like Dubai, Hong Kong and Guangzhou—can avail annual duty-free allowances and tweaking the Atithi app's declaration system for stricter tracking and 'AI-based profiling.' Even if well intended, some of it sounds like a throwback to the days before India's economy was opened up. Back then, our duties were sky-high and airports were notorious for nosy and corrupt officials at customs, whose 'leave us a bottle' demand was so customary that it often went unstated, making a stop at the duty-free shop a ritual of passage. Rules began being eased in the 1980s. As arrival numbers rose, the opening of a walk-through green channel marked a big moment: those with nothing to declare could pass without their bags being opened for scrutiny. Also Read: Centre eyes tighter customs rules to curb smuggling by 'import carriers' What's puzzling is why so many outdated rules persist. There's a limit of about ₹50,000 on the value of goods an Indian resident can bring in free of duty from most countries. This is absurd, given that a single iPhone can cost twice that much. Bizarrely, this allowance varies by various criteria. Such caps should be uniform and set significantly higher if the idea is to keep commercial imports out and block a route that can be used to dodge duties. As the green channel's spirit of trust-based regulation is the current government's stated approach, it would be odd if customs clearance were to get more cumbersome. But then, we have not entirely escaped our long history of protectionism. India's 150% duty on Scotch whisky remains a globally cited example, though a free trade pact with the UK is expected to lower it. Other such agreements could ease other import barriers. If we agree in principle that imports are best eased for larger trade gains, then no policy tweaks should be made that will make it harder for common travellers to comply with our rules. Also Read: Raghuram Rajan: How emerging economies can prosper in a protectionist world Airports need to welcome arrivals, not daunt them. Indian customs declaration forms, whether on paper or digital, look like an anachronism for their complexity. They are a reminder of the closed economy we once had, when packing one's personal stuff would risk flying into a customs web in India. None of this is an argument for authorities to drop their guard against smuggling. Wilful evaders of customs duty need to be nabbed, but let's also keep overreach in check. Don't let the green channel start turning red.
