The report in the alleged sexual harassment case at Panjab University involving the University Business School (UBS) chairperson and dean, faculty, was submitted in the vice-chancellor's office on Monday. The report has stated that the allegations could not be proved in the absence of support from the lone eyewitness, thereby giving a clean chit to the accused in the case.
All the members of the committee after finalising and signing the report had given it to dean, university instructions, (DUI) Madhu Raka, who will further submit it to the V-C's office. The allegation of sexual harassment was levelled by an assistant professor at UBS against department chairperson AK Vashisht and dean, faculty, Dinesh Gupta.
The complainant had alleged that she was sexually harassed and threatened by the said accused outside the UBS department on April 11 evening and a rickshaw-puller was witness to the incident. Later, the complainant had approached the UT police, who registered a first-information report (FIR) in the case against the accused.
The rickshaw-puller gave an affidavit supporting the statements of the complainant. However, when the committee dealing with the case at PU questioned him in the case and asked him to sign his statement, he refused to do so.
The statements by UBS faculty members in support of the accused and with the eyewitness not signing the statements led the committee to submit the report that they could not substantiate the allegations.
{{/usCountry}}The statements by UBS faculty members in support of the accused and with the eyewitness not signing the statements led the committee to submit the report that they could not substantiate the allegations.
{{/usCountry}}Now, it is the V-C's office, which would take a final call on the matter, since the report had been submitted there. Significantly, the outcome of the inquiry report at PU is likely to affect the fate of the FIR as well.
Will move court: complainant
The complainant in the case said she was not happy the way the committee had reached the conclusion that the allegations could not be substantiated.
Speaking to HT, she said, “All the charges are correct and though I have not got a copy of the report, I am told that committee has given a decision in the favour of both the professors. I am going to challenge this decision of the committee in the court of law. I know I am stating the truth and will take the case to the logical end.”