Prashant

The #Metoo vs Due Process :  My story and my life as the child of the woman fighting a sexual harassment case for 11 years

 My name is Prashant. I am sharing this story as my contribution to the voices of #MeToo - a movement that is described as unprecedented.  I dedicate this piece to every Working Mother who has singularly raised her children braving through the many unspoken odds and challenges which also include various form of sexual harassment.

At the outset, I apologise for the length of this story but it encompasses the journey of 11 years. I was only 10 in 2005 when my mother accepted an offer made by KPMG India. She is a single mother since her divorce in 2001.

 Let me start with an unprecedented event that the Nation watched on January 12, 2018. The senior Judges of the Supreme Court of India came out to express their concerns and with a plea that that Judiciary’s independence should be maintained.

 The Nation moved on beyond the headlines. But there are many whose rights and remedies remain under jeopardy as they embark on their journey to seek justice - legally and rightfully. 

My mother's fight was disrupted with case files being lost/ misplaced/ not found  from various forums including the Court Registry – Supreme Court, Delhi High and Bombay High Court. My mother was being defamed and humiliated on the internet since 2007  at back of her original case files of her divorce of 2001  also being ‘ not found’ in Chandigarh Court and which came to be found only in September 2018 after an escalation to the concerned High Court.

Would it be unfair to seek a probe by an independent body ?

1.     The unprecedented fight of my mother and our survival through the challenges :

My mother has been fighting a sexual harassment case against KPMG India for last 11 years as per  Due Process and as per legal advice that that she received. Her first advocate was Dr. Purnima Advani - ex Chairperson of National Commission for Women ( NCW) during 2002 - 2005. My mother was privileged to have some of the best known names in the legal fraternity to represent her. However, the case has never come to the stage of being heard on merit of her complaint. It was kept entangled in writ petitions filed by KPMG India in Bombay High Court by KPMG India / individual accused who knew that the Court cannot look into the merit of the complaint in a writ petition. Whilst my mother was engaged in defending the said writ petitions from time to time, the case files and vital evidence, witness statements and testimonials were declared as having gone missing from the office of the Maharashtra State Women Commission, first in 2008 and again in 2015. No inquiry was conducted to determine the motive and conspiracy behind the loss of case files despite direction from Women and Child Department- Maharashtra in May 2009 and Women and Child Ministry - New Delhi in March 2010. When my mother chose to file a writ petition 5892/2015 in Delhi High Court in May 2015 seeking restoration of her case files, she has been stalked and harrowed.

I am not from legal background. I am not sure if the pattern in which my mother's case files have been lost/ misplaced is normal. To me it shows a pattern to keep my mother deprived of her right to defend - something that the Principle of Natural Justice requires as the bare minimum. Something that is allowed even to the accused of heinous crimes in the legal system that we have.

(a)      Mutual consent divorce in 2001 in Chandigarh District Court in which my mother was Petitioner no. 2- the original files were declared missing from record room and she was able to secure the complete set only on September 2, 2018 after a complaint was escalated to the Principal Judge in March 2018. At the back of such sabotage, her reputation was torn apart on the internet in complete invasion of her privacy and during the pendency of her case before the NCW and MSCW. The affidavit given by my paternal grandfather and my father were of not even referred to by the Police and NCW;

(b)    Writ petition 963/2008 filed by my mother in Bombay High Court on April 8, 2008 seeking expeditious inquiry into her complaint with NCW dated June 2007. This was stalled by a counter writ by KPMG India 1107/2008 which was eventually dismissed as 'infructuous' in November 2010 after the round in Supreme Court in SLP 20416/2008. My mother's affidavit dated October 12, 2010 and also the affirmation register of that month were declared as 'not found/ missing' by the Registry under a reply to a RTI dated January 2015. My mother was advised to withdraw her writ petition conditional on the liberty to prosecute her complaint before NCW, who was Respondent no. 3 in writ petition 963/2008. KPMG India did not challenge the order of dismissal of their writ petition 1107/2008 dated November 2010;

(c)    Criminal application 325/2013 filed by my mother in March 2013 in Bombay High Court seeking the order to condone delay in revision application be set aside as it mis-stated the delay to be 46 days instead of 4.5 years. An order was passed that ' mutually agreed' to file fresh application which was revised on May 6, 2013 after it was pointed out that no consent was given. The certified copy section failed to give her copy of the May 6, 2013 order till it was escalated to the the Registrar General;

(d)      Criminal writ petition 2928/ 2013 filed by my mother in August 2013 in Bombay High Court seeking expeditious criminal Trial in the chargesheet filed by Mumbai Police in December 2007 against the perpetrators of sexual harassment - Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh and others. This was disposed on November 29, 2013 stating that as an application was filed by my mother seeking further investigation, she can request the Trial Court to expedite the Trial. The order drew reference to my mother's application seeking further investigation. However, the certified copy section of Bombay High Court refused to provide a copy stating that it is not taken on record. This order was passed just one day after an order was passed by Bombay High Court giving an ex- parte stay on NCW inquiry in the second writ petition filed by KPMG India in November 2013. KPMG India stated they are aggrieved by an order that hatNCW had passed on October 26, 2013 to 'adjudicate' and  hence, exceeded it's jurisdiction. As per the Chatwal Committee report to NCW dated April 2016 taken on record by Delhi High Court on November 17, 2016, such an order does not exist;

(e)     Writ petition 5892/2015 in Delhi High Court seeking restoration of records stated to be lost/ misplaced by NCW. NCW submitted that it had set up a Fact Finding Committee under Mr. O.P. Chatwal and would take action based on their report. In June 2015 when my mother applied for certified copy of the proceedings, and orders, the application itself was stated to be ' not found'. Later the case file was stated to be ' Lost' in a written reply by the Registry. It came to be found only after the matter was escalated. This petition was disposed on July 19, 2015 with an order that NCW would comply with the order within 12 weeks. NCW closed the matter that no action was required to be taken based on instruction of ' Competent Authority'.

In sum and substance, petitions filed by my mother are tossed around leading to her efforts being rendered meaningless without any outcome. Her right of say/ defence has been consistently obstructed even where she is a respondent ( in capacity as the original informant/ complainant) in writ petitions filed by other side seeking quashing of the Inquiry/ Trial in the Bombay High Court.

As a layperson, I am given to understand that writ lies against the State. It is also observed that the say filed by the public prosecutor in the writ petitions filed by KPMG India and accused is also not found on record or remains untagged.

Mumbai Mirror, the media platform which allowed the launch of cyber attacks on my mother since the reported arrest of accused Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh on October 9, 2007  have also denied her the right of say.  This news came just after NCW transferred the case to Maharashtra State Women Commission ( MSCW) with my mother's complaint, replies and rejoinder to complete the inquiry within 60 days and submit a report. Since, then the matter has been kept entangled in writ petitions, obstructing any move of my mother to go outside the State of Maharashtra.  

2.       Second inquiry by NCW pursuant to TOI impact (2013 to date) – Found and Lost files game :

There has been complete quiet of the public - spirited activists who want women to speak and also the media. TOI took credit for getting NCW to find the lost case files in January 2013 and set up a new Inquiry Committee headed by Mrs. Nirmala Samant Prabhavalkar. This news item followed just after the Ministry of Information Technology and Communication confirmed that the defamatory blogs were blocked under an order of the Magistrate Court.

In February 2015, NCW declared the Files as  'Lost' for second time after NCW inquiry was quashed in August 2014 in the writ filed by KPMG India. NCW failed to challenge the order of Bombay High Court despite the findings of the Chatwal Committee taken on record by Delhi High Court in writ petition 5892/2015 filed by my mother seeking restoration of the case files.

In April 2015, Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh filed a criminal writ petition seeking quashing of criminal case and stated that issue of process order by the Magistrate taking cognisance of the chargesheet filed by Police on December 15, 2007 is ' missing'. However, before NCW, Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh had submitted on October 26, 2013 that the process is issued by Magistrate and criminal Trial is to commence and hence NCW should adjourn the matter sine- die.

TOI reported the development through this news item in April 2015. Thereafter, there has been no update on the proceedings in Delhi High Court to seek restoration of the Lost/ Misplaced case files from NCW.

https://www.livemint.com/Politics/v8RrlLY5QvAj4JtgRsMhRK/What-happens-when-women-complain-of-sexual-harassment.html

In 2016, the Fact Finding Committee headed by Mr. O.P. Chatwal ( retd DIG - Central Bureau of Investigation) set up by NCW pursuant to the writ petition 5892/2015 filed in Delhi High Court held Mrs. Nirmala Samant Prabhavalkar and the members of the Inquiry Committee members as being responsible for loss of original case files.

This would leave anyone wondering was the real purpose of the NCW inquiry to give justice to my mother.

3.       Identity abuse to Identity Theft and creating an environment of fear and paranoi to break down the victim :

Truly, we are in the era of greater Transparency and Better Governance. There are handles and blogs to report. The email address and mobile number shared by my mother have led to creation of multiple fake FB profiles and social media accounts.

It was only in November 2015 that  a case of identity theft and impersonation registered by Mumbai Police in November 2015.  

A recent reply from NCW states that 569 complaints were filed under the same name as my mother – with variants in spelling and surname. It is not known what process does NCW follow to verify the identity of the complainant as being genuine. They refused to provide further details citing section 11 of RTI Act.

The social community that we belong to ( Maheshwari) was also being used to mediate on a  matter that pending inquiry and Trial before NCW and Magistrate Court. The police's recent suggestion is that my mother should change her name and identity to be at peace and better still she should move to a foreign location.

There is hacking, blackmail, threat, isolation and gag.

Surely, we are in a progressive era where there are campaign  'beti bachao, beti padoa' had by Women and Child Ministry which is said to have been an outright success. NCW has been deliberating on a new Act to protect the Rights of the Single Mother etc.

Has NCW also developed the norms to decide criteria of 'Fitment'  for victims to voice sexual harassment ?

Yet, there is no outrage as is normally seen when a politically inclined / affiliated men use words to describe women as  dented and painted, 100% tunch maal and many other misogynistic comments.

4.     The conduct of certain NCW officers/ members raises several doubts about whose rights was the Institution protecting :   

Had NCW replied to the RTI dated December 12, 2013 in which my mother had sought copy of the NCW order dated October 26, 2013 ( aggrieved by which KPMG India went to the Court in their second writ petition), the outcome of the Bombay high Court petition may have been different in August 2014.

It was only after the matter went to the Central Information Commission ( CIC) and an order was passed on December 30, 2014, that NCW replied on February 1, 2015 that case files were Lost/ Not Found / Misplaced. It remained silent about the existence of it's order dated October 26,2013.

Despite a pending RTI application with NCW since December 12, 2013, the NCW inquiry came to be quashed on August 8, 2014 stating that my mother had liberty to pursue the police cases of cyber abuse and criminal case of sexual harassment that  are State vs Accused. 

The fact also is that KPMG India is working with the Government on many projects. This was also revealed by an officer of the Ministry of Women and Child. Can there be fairness ? 

It is NCW who had advised my mother’s advocate to file a FIR and for which an opinion was taken from the Chief Prosecutor.

My mother's right to prosecute criminal case is seen to be  sabotaged in a criminal writ petition 1222/2015 filed by Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh in April 2015. The Registrar General of Bombay High Court told my mother in October 2017 when she placed her application to argue in person that in a police case, the original informant is not required to be heard as the offence is against the State.

In May 2015, my mother was compelled to seek restoration of her case files through a writ petition 5892/2015 in Delhi High Court. For failure of NCW to keep safe custody of the case files, my mother at her own cost and time was compelled to invoke this remedy.

On December 15, 2015, NCW through an affidavit submitted to Delhi High Court that it had established a Fact Finding Committee under Mr. O.P. Chatwal ( retd DIG- CBI).

In October 2016, there was a news item that KPMG Global steps in to take charge of Indian operations.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/consultancy-/-audit/kpmg-drama-global-heads-step-in-to-steady-ship/articleshow/55123333.cms

On November 17, 2016 Delhi High Court took on record the Chatwal Committee report and directed my mother to take inspection of the NCW records and determine the final list of missing documents.

Delhi High Court disposed the writ petition 5892/2015 petition on July 19, 2017 directing NCW to comply with the findings and recommendations of Chatwal Committee's report within 12 weeks. On July 28, 2017  NCW send a letter to the DGP – Maharashtra seeking a report on the cyber cases of identity theft and hacking. NCW closed the case through a reply dated February 2018 and July 2018 stating that they did not wish to take any further action as much time has elapsed.  

Since then, both the NCW and DGP – Maharashtra have remained incommunicado and inaccessible with not a single meeting having been allowed. Even request for a meeting with the Police Commissioner are simply diverted to the DCP - cyber crime, whose laxity is a subject- matter of escalation. Since the time of our interaction with cyber police station in Mumbai in 2010, the first dedicated DCP was appointed in January 2016. Between January 2016 and November 2018, there have been change of 4 officers at level of Deputy Commissioner of Police that we have met, the longest serving being Mr Akbar Pathan ( May 2017 to November 2018).  

In February 2018, when my mother sought copies of the minutes of hearing held by NCW since July 2014, NCW rejected her application under Right to Information stating it is fiduciary in nature. Again CIC intervened and passed an order in May 2018 ( case number 610721). CIC held that  " Fiduciary question does not arise at all. It is the duty of the NCW to say what it is doing. It is the right of not only the complainant but also of every person to know what action was taken by the NCW on the complaint. The Supreme Court, High Courts and Police Stations also reveal what cases were filed and what happened along with date of hearing, names of the parties and their advocates along with full text of judgment. Is this fiduciary related information and people should not ask for it".  

Immediately, thereafter, the NCW's website crashed for about a month. Later, in July 2018 NCW reluctantly posted the minutes of hearing, the tour details of the members of the Commission and numeric count of complaints received with their status.

I am taking a pause here to re- iterate my question - where is the Due Process for victims who dare to speak ? 

 ========================================================

   5. # MeToo - is it an alternative to a tardy and unfair and insensitive legal delivery system ? 

I have been watching the  #MeToo slow down as a defamation suit came to filed by the High Profile alleged Harasser. Keeping a matter entangled in litigation in a tardy system such as we have in India, works reasonably well for any High Profile Harasser  (alleged) even as the victim is subject to repeated harassment and disruption in her Right to Life and Liberty.

If the victim happens to be a ‘Divorcee’ or ‘ Single’ then a reverse profiling follows. The disruptive forces under the name of 'legal defence' often are combined with unconnected parties including the wife and family of the High Profile Harassers and certain disgruntled colleagues who find it a matter of convenience to throw in their hat to give a good character certificate to the alleged harasser/(s). The victim is literally stalked to identify  neighbours, maids, drivers, relatives and just about anyone who can offer some adverse comments about the conduct of the victim and which can be used on media and the internet  blogs to create a perception that is a contrast to the reality and also contrary to the real evidence in support of her complaint against the harasser. The victim's character must pass the parameters of patriarchal mindset to be considered ' Fit' to allege sexual harassment.

I am not attempting to be the spokesperson for my mother. I am sure she is capable to speak for herself. But this is my perspective of having watched the journey that my mother undertook to seek justice and when I got sucked into the most undesired incident that was precipitated in Bombay High Court on April 23, 2014 in full know of the advocates in the court room and the court reporters. However, there was no reaction to the unprecedented event that transpired though NCW advocate did put across it’s dissent in the written submission on April 30, 2014. But nothing what others said or submitted or expressed was considered or reported by the media. There was no outrage.

I was made to sit in the Court room and hear the 2 hours of argument of the other side counsel. I had merely gone to submit an adjournment application with the medical certificate of my mother whose RBC was a low of 7 and she was advised rest for 3 weeks. I was made to listen to legal arguments though I am not a law student. I was not allowed to rebut, either. I was helpless and seethed in anger that my mother had never shared with me what she has been enduring all by herself. My mother spoke to an activist from AIDWA who said that ‘it happens’. Another lady advocate said that ‘ It will make the kid stronger’. I guess, it was all ok.  

On the next date i.e May 9, 2014 , the Judge said that it was time for parties to 'move on'. I have been wondering since then, if the end - result of a fight straddled in writ petitions against the State are dismissed as infructuous is that victim should ' Move on', then # MeToo is possibly the only option that a victim has. On June 13, 2014 my mother's personal details were compromised to create profiles on Matrimonial website. Is this what was implied by ' moving on' for a divorcee fighting a sexual harassment case.

Between June 27 and July 4, 2014 the original case files went missing from Bombay High Court writ department. On July 4, 2014 an order was passed giving more time to the parties to have a mutual dialogue. On August 4, 2014 the CEO of KPMG India informed my mother that she can inform the Court that the dialogue has failed and to proceed with the pronouncement of order. 

On August 8, 2014 Bombay High Court, NCW quashed the NCW inquiry on a ground that NCW had exceeded it's jurisdiction by passing an order dated October 26, 2013 to adjudicate and give reliefs to the victim. The Chatwal Committee has held in 2016 that no copy of the order can be given  under her RTI application dated December 12, 2013 as no order was passed by NCW. The NCW Act states that all orders are passed/ authenticated by Member Secretary or designate officer.

From the above, can it be said that victim is abusing the court process at her cost and time and with risk to her life and liberty ?

One of her ex- colleagues since 1992 stated that 'bail' is given to an accused so that he can live in the society with respect. Sure, but should be at cost of demolishing the  victim's sense of selfhood and sabotage of her Right to constitutional remedy. These are serious questions and especially for those who want victims to follow Due Process.

What I am stating is nothing new. Neither am I the spokeperson here. It is her fight and her Right under sabotage.  

But, this is my perspective as the child who has seen the challenges faced by my mother who followed a Due Process.  She did not name and shame the perpetrators though she had more than enough to talk about and write about though. She was trained by corporates she worked for, to follow the Due Process. She has been too straight - forward and trusting and above all having faith in the legal delivery system.

 She was told by KPMG India International Ethics Committee in June 2007 to pursue the legal course as they did not have jurisdiction over KPMG India and yet the legal process is being sabotaged.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/08/women-complain-sexual-harassment-branded-a-troublemaker

In the last 11 years, no inquiry on merit of evidence has been allowed to progress either in NCW or the criminal case against the individuals perpetrators due to writ petitions filed by KPMG India and the individual accused seeking quashing of the inquiry. I did not know then but now I understand that in a writ jurisdiction, the Court cannot look into the merit of the allegations. But what has remained and continued was cyber harassment, defamation and abuse to my mother who happens to be a Divorcee and Single by choice since 2001.

This status of Divorcee was not of any consequence to any Employer who hired her and it did not affect the quality of her work deliverable. But it became the talking point only because she sought an inquiry into sexual harassment that she endured in her 14 months in KPMG India.

=========================================================

6.  Through my eyes as the child of a victim of criminal conspiracy :

I am sharing my own experience of having closely watched my mother – a Divorcee and Single by choice, fight a sexual harassment case against KPMG India for last 11 years. All that she was seeking was an inquiry but she was named and shamed on media and internet platforms through comments and posts – which were unmoderated, unverified, unsubstantiated and the Mumbai cyber police and NCW stood onlookers to the devious design to systematically break her down.

For a ‘High Profile’ defendant to resort to such tactic to stall an Inquiry by NCW who they refer to as Toothless is indeed very strange. My mother dared to speak out in 2006 when the environment was not so enabling and she took the risk despite being Single working parent with responsibility of a minor child. Since then she has stood her ground.

 To me, my mother has never been scared to take risks and bear the outcome of decision that she took.  She has surged ahead with a conviction despite all criticism and bickering, within and outside to make way for herself and to create an identity of her own - an identity that came to be abused, bashed and stolen. Maybe the course she chose is termed as going against the wind or unconventional or challenging status- quo.

My mother broke the convention of the 'conservative' family. She was the First person in the Family to be a CA. She told me that at that time when she appeared for her Sunday examination of CA in Kolkatta, there were just 3 -4 women in the big room. The commerce stream was not even open for co-education in St. Xavier's - Kolkatta. 

My mother was the First in the Family to have an inter- caste marriage. It was not easy as it met with threat of suicide by my grandmother who eventually came around and such that her relationship with my mother remained post the divorce which she said was with her son. She was a doctorate in Hindi and an academician and always encouraged my mother to be financially independent.

My mother was the First in the Family to opt for mutual consent divorce in 2001. She did not seek any maintenance for herself or for me as she was sure of her competence and capability to earn for ourselves. The divorce was taken after having invested herself in the relationship for 9 years and much deliberation by both sides.

 It has never been easy before or after that as a Divorcee – an adjective used to bully her in most uncivil and cruel manner.  

 

She is the First to have taken upon herself the role of single mother who has performed duties diligently.  

She is the First in the Family to have raised her voice against an injustice caused to her at workplace.  But little did she know that what was to follow and that have her wonder, has the mindset really changed ?

So, does all this portray my mother as a 'difficult woman', of the kind that this article by veteran writer and columnist, Shobha Dey.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/politically-incorrect/dear-men-theres-no-getting-away-from-difficult-women/

I am the child of this difficult woman who has been brought up differently. I may also risk attracting a few labels.

 Should  I wait to express my views on the deplorable state of affairs  after my mother is dead. I choose to say it now and through this note as the one who has closely watched the fight of 11 years and have also been affected. I wear the bruise of the backlash unleashed upon my mother causing upon me a victimisation of a different kind. I can only describe this " Ordinary people being put to extra- ordinary situations " when they take those in position of Power.   

The fight of my mother is one of  David vs Goliath - a fight of unequal. Instead of being applauded for the courage, consistency and conviction, my mother was named and shamed and defamed starting the revelation of name and photo on the front page of Mumbai Mirror on October 9, 2007 whilst reporting the news of arrest of Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh in the criminal case registered by Mumbai Police. Since then we have continued to be targeted and harassed to cause withdrawal of this case as if the arrest of accused followed by cyber abuse to the victim was the ultimate objective of the FIR and not for it go to Trial.

Certainly, this may be an act of Bravery – an adjective that many have used to describe those who have spoken out. But, should this leave her a martyr – bare to the soul ?

Those who have interacted with me at different points in time, may have heard me voice some of the  concerns that plague the justice delivery system. Some wondered about the reason for such a passionate rant, at which point I may have told you about my mother’s experiences with respect to case of sexual harassment that she has been pursuing against a MNC.

In this fight, there was also ‘Me’ who remained an observer even as our Right to Life and it’s Means to it were under attack.

As an introduction of myself, I have always said that I am brought up by a single parent – my mother.  There is no one else who has contributed to me welfare and well-being and for me to be what I am and how I am.  

I continue to be affected by the  games that played out in the name of legal defense and one such ploy has been  to make my mother’s divorce a matter of public rebuke and humiliation, without calling for our say and verification. I am the witness to the divorce and how my mother has conducted herself all through so far as my father and his family is concerned. And many of the advocates on both sides happened to be women whilst the matter of Inquiry before Women Commission remained in litigation for 10 years. But none did anything to stop the menace.  

The world is cruel but what can be more cruel than to hurt a person and then  gag her into a silence over threat to her child. Her silence led to the abuse that she endured. She was abused when she chose to speak.  

I see and read a lot of posts of people around me, on social media platform, asking victims to speak up, but I don’t think they, or the victim who contemplate the decision of speaking up, fully understand of what this really means. By speaking up, I mean following due process, utilizing the supposed remedies as offered by Indian judiciary and actually embarking upon the journey to seek justice against perpetrators that violated you.

Therefore, to me speaking up doesn’t entail just naming the perpetrator publicly, or sharing the victim’s experience anonymously.  Through this write up, I am making a  sincere effort on my part to share through my mother’s journey,  what speaking up really means for a victim and for following a path that she chose because she felt that she had lost a sense of her livelihood, a sense of her identity and a sense of her 'being'. Something that she had build with her own effort having been divorce in 2001 and not having taken a single penny as maintenance either for herself or for me.  

My tone as I proceed is likely to change from being optimistic, to angry, to being helpless, and finally to being dejected. Those emotions also happen to be the rollercoaster that my mother went through, in exactly that order, over these 11 years. My purpose is simple here. The wave of feminism in the last decade has taught us a lot. It started by creating awareness about gender, to educating us, to maybe empowering us to speak up.

But what comes after this?

What have we been told about actually pursuing justice? I personally have read little about the last piece which I think happens to be most crucial, because it is about closure. Maybe some find closure in feeling empowered to speak up, and for them that’s the end of it. But I would like to believe for some others, the need for justice is the closure they desire, simply because our democratic process allows for that.  I hope not to infuse a sense of pessimism in the readers through this, but we really hope that your support can inspire renewed sense of optimism for my mother and me.

================================================================

7.  My mother’s career and personal life came under siege BECAUSE she spoke up:

1992 :  My mother qualified as a Chartered Accountant (CA). She joined EY in their audit and assurance practice. During audit of Godrej & Boyce, sometime in 1997, she was offered a position in a new joint venture in Chandigarh. It was in August 1997, that my mother joined Godrej. She changed gear from advisory to industry stint. She left Bombay to chart her way into an unknown terrain and an unfamiliar place. My first kindergarten school started in Chandigarh and I won my first medal in a sports event at the age of 5  given by the Finance Minister of Punjab. I was trained for this event by my maternal grandfather - Nana, someone who has always been there for me and my mother.

Incidentally, August 1997 was the month when a landmark Judgement of Vishaka was delivered which was also referred to as judicial activism and Pathbreaking. It referred to International convention for Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). It drew a set of guidelines that Every Employer was mandated to follow to Prevent and Redress Sexual Harassment at Workplace. These guidelines were declared as the Law of the Land till a suitable legislation was formulated by the Executive. The Executive took 16 years to bring out about the new Act, sometime in 2013.

January 2001: My parents underwent a separation by mutual consent under section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act. I am a witness to the divorce and the day remain etched in my mind when the Judge had asked me to convey my choice of parent with whom I would like to stay. I looked at my mother as she was the one who had held my hand always and nurtured me. She stood there next to my father. He nodded in consent. This is the picture I have of them being seen together, last in that winter of 2001.

October 2001: My father wrote a letter to my mother whilst sending her a copy of the divorce decree and said that this was the only way to set her free and to be happy. He wrote that his personal and professional life has been reduced to shambles due to atrocity he faced at home and that he was inclined to move out. My mother accepted the notarized photocopy as the Final copy and with no reason to believe otherwise. It was only in 2010 when she was asked to produce a Court certified copy of the divorce decree necessary for my passport renewal that she came to know that the original divorce files were missing from the record room. After much escalation and inquiry directed by the Punjab & Haryana Court in March 2018 resulting in an administrative order on April 24, 2018, she was able to secure a complete set of the divorce proceedings on September 2, 2018.

In the interim period and between the lost and found game of her original divorce files, my mother has been subject to lot of abuse and humiliation through unverified stories about her character and integrity. But she had not comprehended that loss of the original records of her mutual consent divorce could be a part of a larger conspiracy and the number of people involved in it.

In August 2001, after a fruitful stint in Godrej, she returned to Mumbai in 2001 and joined back EY. As my mother was adapting to the significant transformation in her personal life, I was also coping with the fact of being away from her for 3 years as I was not able to get admission in a good school in Mumbai. We were both dealing with emotional and psychological voids in our lives. It wasn’t the time of what’s app or Facebook. She strove to create her own identity and space.  She toiled through the ranks of EY and her performance is well rated.

It was in mid – 2005, that a head-hunter firm, Hures Consulting, began to call her for a position in KPMG India.  Even though my mother’s initial response to a potential shift was lukewarm, Vikram Uttamsingh, senior partner at KPMG who had contracted Hures Consulting, kept up his efforts to poach her. A few meetings down the line and three levels of interview, led KPMG to put forth an impressive offer. An offer that my mother found attractive.  After much deliberation, she decided to quit E&Y and join KPMG India on September 19, 2005.

Around the same time, she was also approached by another competitor. As my mother had made up her mind about KPMG India, she communicated the same to the competitor firm. However, the partner who made the approach provided a word of caution. My mother did not pay much heed to this at that point of time. However, in one of her final meetings before accepting the offer, she did speak to the accused, Vikram Uttamsingh and he assured her that they have consciously hired more women and he was confident that this would also bring in inclusivity, diversity and sensitization. Feeling assured, she took up the offer and once again changed gear. She joined KPMG India as a Director in the Due Diligence Practice in the month of September 2005.

What followed in the 14 months at KPMG India has been unprecedented for her.  It left my mother baffled and shaken. There were Instances after instances of acts that would legally qualify as ‘sexual harassment’. It affected her right to work with dignity. Instead of steering the work culture to ensure that women were made to feel secure, it was expected out of the woman to ‘accommodate’ and behave like ‘a team player’. They were expected to enjoy the jokes passed off as ‘office banter’. Dissenting against any of this behavior would be considered ‘ thin skinned’. From the perspective of my mother, who was outside of this ‘men’s club’, the environment can be best described as unwelcome, hostile, humiliating, indecent, perverse and misogynistic. Whilst KPMG India in it's own submission stated that it had made efforts to remover her performance manager but she continued to be in the same department headed by the same perpetrator and who had full control on her appraisal. He wrote a comment on May 2, 2006 - 4 days before  on her interim appraisal was actually held on May 6, 2006 (saturday) that my mother was accusatory in nature and had difficulty working as a Team. The same person had send out welcome mails to various clients when she joined in September 2005 stating that my mother had joined KPMG India alongwith a small Team. To this a few clients also responded congratulating Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh for snaring a good resource and that they look forward to working on new engagements. A client also wrote to my mother that he was aware as his views were sought about her work. In October 2006 (a month before her abrupt termination) 3 other partners with whom my mother had worked had send their views on my mother's performance.

I have seen my mother in stress. If she could not attend an internal training and gave more priority to a client delivery or if she excused herself from a partner - Director call meant to discuss internal issues as her phone was withheld by the moderator in Training program that ( sponsored by the Company), she was labelled as 'lacking code of conduct and team play'. Such efforts to humiliate and attack her and somehow make a case that she was lacking code of conduct had intensified after she expressed her intent to resign in October 2006.

She refused to relent. She escalated the matter to an Oversight Board and sought an independent inquiry. An expected backlash followed by way of an abrupt and unjustified termination via email on November 30, 2006 after an email from one of the Board member, Mr. Vijay Malhotra to her and the CEO of KPMG India declaring her complaint as 'baseless and unfounded' and advising the CEO of KPMG to take legal advice for making false allegations. Within five hours of receiving that mail from Vijay Malhotra, she received her termination letter duly signed by the CEO of KPMG India via email. She was shut out of the system. A blank was drawn.

As long as my mother did not escalate to the Board, it was all alright. But when she offered to resign on the grounds that she was unable to cope with the indecent conduct, she was invited for a purported  annual appraisal and an attempt was made to coerce her to accept that she was low on values and ethics.  There were desperate efforts by the 2 partners – Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh and Mr. Abizer Diwanji to constantly make a case that she was low on values and code of conduct. 

I am stating these instances as the 'evidence' that my mother has submitted has been caused to go missing from Women Commission and her writ petition 963/2008 was stalled by KPMG India's counter petition 1107/2008. My mother's Right to earn her livelihood had a direct impact on my overall well being and welfare. My mother had the Right to live with dignity in the society as much as the Accused out on bail. 

I recall that a hard copy of the termination letter came by post and I received it on December 1, 2006 . I read it and was pained. My question to her was that what will happen to the house. She held my hand and said that no one can destroy what we have build. I hoped it would be just the way that my mother had thought it would be.

My mother decided to serve KPMG India with a legal notice within 12 days of being terminated, inquiring the reasons behind her abrupt termination and failure to do an inquiry for the indecent and derogatory behavour meted out to her. KPMG responded stating that they were not obligated to provide any explanation and my mother did not have a right to seek any explanation for the abrupt termination. On advice of her advocate, she escalated the matter to KPMG International Ethics Committee, seeking an inquiry under the ‘hotline reporting mechanism’. They acknowledged the complaint but responded refusing to intervene on the ground that KPMG India was not within their jurisdiction but also stated that they take all such matters very seriously.

Hence, the argument often provided by KPMG lawyers – “she never made any  complaint or asked for an inquiry" needs to be verified with the evidence that my mother has submitted to the investigating authority and also to NCW.

8.   The “high profile” case plagued by cheap tactics:

Having pushed for, and exhausted all options, that were available within KPMG India and KPMG International network, she spent the following few months, deliberating and discussing next steps. Despite the termination, she had positive conversations with competing firms and others, who expressed keenness to bring her onboard. However, internally, she remained disturbed at the humiliation she was made to go through. She decided to pursue her cause. The moment she was clear about this and filed an official complaint of sexual harassment against KPMG with Maharashtra State Women Commission (MSCW), a quasi-judicial body, those who were evincing interest in having a dialogue with her, backed off. It is important to clarify that my mother was keen to pick up her career from where it was AND pursue the fight because it was her choice and right to do so. However, the system refused to offer both choices to her, as it often does with women in general (family v/s career).

In those months of deliberation, my mother received a lot of active interest from lawyers, journalist and women activists. Their words contained support and filled my mother with hope. Everyone opined that due process should be followed, and it also seemed like the most obvious thing to my mother. My mother moved forward believing what was told to her and that she would get justice.

At no stage was she advised by her designated advocates to file a suit for damages. Not even in 2010 when her advocates advised her to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to prosecute the complaint before NCW, respondent no. 3. At no stage, did NCW stated that it will not conduct an inquiry.

Everyone including her advocates, journalists, activists directed her to the Women Commission who had the right to conduct an inquiry. Her advocate who put in motion the process to file a complaint with NCW and also the FIR was the  ex- chairperson of National Commission for Women between 2002 – 2005. She had no reason to doubt the legal strategy or approach.

In a complete contrast, after 11 years, my mother is being told by those who led her on to this path that NCW is a toothless body and governed by political appointees and interests. At no stage did NCW state that it has no right to do an inquiry and even Bombay High Court in the order passed in August 2014 held that NCW can inquire into individual complaints but cannot adjudicate. But who had sought reliefs ? This is a ground for KPMG India's second writ petition filed in November 2013 There was  an averment made by KPMG India that it was aggrieved by the order  that NCW passed on October 26, 2013 to adjudicate and give reliefs. My mother was not summoned for this hearing. Instead, she was summoned for a hearing on October 25, 2013 held in New Delhi by News Broadcasting Standards Authority ( NBSA). NBSA was hearing her complaint against a broadcaster for a program aired on May 22, 2013 in which her name was revealed and also wrong information was disseminated that the criminal case against Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh was quashed. NCW failed to give a copy of the NCW dated October 26, 2013 even under the RTI application dated December 12, 2013. The entire set of certified copy of record and proceedings of KPMG writ petition given to my mother in January 2015 also did not have a copy of the said NCW order dated October 26, 2013. In February 2015, NCW declared the case files as Missing/ Lost/ Misplaced from the office of Maharashtra State Women Commission ( MSCW).

My mother was compelled to approach Delhi High Court in May 2015 through writ petition 5892/2015  seeking restoration of 'Lost/ Misplaced' case files from NCW.  NCW was issued notice by Delhi High Court in August 2015. It filed an affidavit in Delhi High Court that it had mandated Mr. O.P. Chatwal ( retd DIG- CBI) to look into the case of second time missing files and name those responsible for the loss of files for second time. The Chatwal Committee submitted a report which was considered by Delhi High Court in November 2016 naming the persons responsible for loss of original files and also stating that no order was passed by NCW on October 26, 2013.  

There is silence of the media and of the activists and also NCW about the findings of Chatwal Committee and proceedings in Delhi High Court in writ petition 5892/2015 and on the Due Process followed by my mother and the shocking Loss of  original divorce files from Chandigarh Court, case files from NCW/ MSCW and Bombay High Court.

There is silence of the members of the second Inquiry Committee set up under order of NCW dated March 21, 2013 though they have been named in the Chatwal Committee report as Persons responsible for the purported Loss of case files. This order was passed after the revision application of one accused was admitted in Sewri Session Court on March 5, 2013 in which the delay was mis- stated as 46 days as against the 5 years delay since the issue of process order dated December 15, 2007.

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/evidence-withheld-for-5-years-in-mumbai-sexual-harassment-trial/article4692717.ece#!

The revision was withdrawn unconditionally by the accused in January 2014 whilst the writ petition filed by KPMG India seeking quashing of NCW Inquiry was pending before Bombay High Court. 

9.  The Women Commission and Police case used by KPMG India to reduce the complaint to that of State v/s accused and sabotage of rights of victim  :

On advice from an advocate, my mother first approached the Maharashtra State Women Commission (MSCW) in April 2007. The then member secretary of MSCW, Mrs. Sanjvini Kutty, suggested to my mother’s advocate that it would be best to approach National Commission for Women (NCW), who would be best equipped to handle such a “high profile case”, (since it involved a MNC). My mother was then directed to Advocate Purnima Advani (Chairperson of NCW from 2002-2005). A complaint settled by her advocate was registered by NCW on June 2007.

By virtue of the position that Advocate Purnima Advani held as the Chairperson of the NCW my mother believed that she was fully aware of the functions and powers of NCW. Further, Advocate Gayatri Singh led the the writ petition 963/2008 seeking an inquiry from the Women Commission. Even in February 2013, Advocate Gayatri Singh asked my mother to file a writ petition seeking an inquiry and send her a draft. But it was not filed as NCW made a announcement though the media that it would complete the inquiry in a time bound manner.

It is more than evident that it has never been desired that my mother should lead the petition and if she had then she would be in control and there would be transparency. 

After having registered the case in June 2007, NCW also advised my mother that a FIR be filed against the individual perpetrators, without delay. My mother’s advocate made an application for FIR to the Mumbai Police – Crime Branch. The then Joint Commissioner of Crime, Rakesh Maria, took an opinion from the Public prosecutor as it was referred by NCW and termed as ‘ high profile’. Based on the opinion, NM Joshi police station registered a FIR under sections 354, 509, 34 of IPC against individual accused Vikram Uttamsingh,

Abizer Diwanji, Aneesh Maloo, Avinash Vijayshankar in July 2007 and section 188 of IPC against the CEO, COO, HR head of KPMG India

In all forums, KPMG India submitted that it had set up a Vishaka Committee in April 2007 headed by ex-Partner Mrs. Bhavna Doshi. In fact, upon receiving the first complaint made to MSCW by my mother, KPMG India CEO responded stating that he was shocked to read what she had gone through. The same CEO had signed the termination letter on November 30, 2006. It is extremely important to point out that, at no stage, did my mother receive any communication from this committee that was supposedly set up.

My mother was very clear that KPMG India and KPMG International had already shut the door on her and declared her complaints as devoid of merit and hence, could not have conducted a Trial after the verdict and be the judge and prosecutor in their own case. The termination had broken the relationship of an employee and employer. The setting up of the Committee was only to divert the inquiry by Women Commission to itself.

The fact remains that there was no communication from this purported committee, or it’s  members to espouse confidence that it was independent. In her official reply to KPMG through her advocate, expressed that an ex-employer cannot reclaim his right to hold a Vishaka inquiry having terminated her services, without an inquiry and that principles of Natural Justice would be flouted in the evening of doing so.

It is important to state that even in the New Act of 2013 ( Prevention and Redessal of Sexual Harassment Act at Workplace) it recognizes that in cases where there is no lady senior to the complainant to head the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC), and where the complaint is also against the Employer, the case should be referred to the State Level Committee.

Hence, KPMG India’s repeated insistence on having it’s own Committee was an eye- wash.

In July 2007, an ex- colleague from KPMG India, Ms. Neha Karande approached my mother on behalf of Mr. Aneesh Maloo that he had already tendered his apology to an in- house inquiry conducted by KPMG advocates and hence wanted his name removed from the FIR.

The information was given to  the investigating police officer to verify the facts. But no action came to be taken.  

In August 2007 or so, KPMG India’s  CEO and COO filed a criminal writ petition 1445/ 2007 seeking quashing of the offence under section 188 of IPC stating that it applies when there is a breach of order of a Public Servant and that non- compliance of Vishaka guidelines is a direction under order of the Supreme Court. The order in criminal writ 1445/2007 was reserved for almost a year and was pronounced only on August 6, 2008.

In September 2007 or so, the other accused Mr. Aneesh Maloo filed a criminal writ 1703/2007 which came to be withdrawn on October 4, 2007. In 2015, my mother learnt that her reply in the matter was erroneously placed in another case file. 

In the same period (July to October 2007), NCW conducted hearings. NCW perused the written replies of NCW and the rejoinder filed by my mother.

On October 8, 2007 NCW transferred the case to MSCW to complete the inquiry within 60 days and submit a report. NCW considered this step considering that both parties and witnesses resided in Mumbai and it would expedite the matter. MSCW constituted an Inquiry Committee headed by Mrs. Susieben Shah and co-opted a member each from India Centre for Human Rights and  NGO – Majlis.

On same day i.e October 8, 2007 the accused Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh was arrested by Mumbai Police in the FIR registered based on my mother’s complaint through her advocate. Mumbai Mirror, the English daily that reported the arrest on its front page but chose to expose my mother’s name and identity. This gave way to derogatory, defamatory, abusive, offensive and humiliating comments on their blog. The same were also replicated on other blogs which were operated by groups usually advocating for men’s rights. The comments got murkier and meant to incite voyeurism and sadistic pleasure. Everything from my mother’s marriage life to her current state was up for discussion and judgement. These weren’t just any trolls, they seemed orchestrated and was an evil design to irrepairably damage my mother’s reputation and image. 

I was too young to understand everything that was happening around me, but that front page story on Mumbai Mirror on October 9, 2007 with my mother’s picture and name, left me baffled in ways that I would only understand, later. I always felt annoyed and angry and helpless when questioned. I withdrew and my school was quick to recognize and respond.  At the housing complex, I was being bullied by the elder boys. I was unable to communicate with my mother as she was going through her own fight to survive. 

It is during the sessions with counsellor that made me aware that the event left an indelible impression on my mind.  I wanted to forget it but I could not. In a passive manner, it was influencing me in many ways. I wanted to protect my mother but I was helpless and remained an onlooker.

It upset me that even the advocates who were representing my mother did nothing to take action against such cyber attacks. It upset me that NCW did not take any action though in many other cases, it is quick to take suo- motto action against such trolls. In this case, NCW had every reason to intervene as cyber onslaught started immediately after they registered the case of sexual harassment and send it to MSCW for inquiry on October 8, 2007.

Around the same time, the advocate who had taken my mother’s case to NCW abruptly discharged stating that there is a conflict with the appointed counsel of the other side.

To me, it appeared that what could not be done directly as legal defence or within KPMG by the accused, was being done through media and other platforms using pseudo names and impersonating our friends, relatives, ex- colleagues and neighbors  to post comments.  The Police did not register a cyber case despite compelling evidence and affidavit of my grandparents that the comments were false and baseless with sole intent to dissuade my mother from pursuing her case of sexual harassment. The cyber police did not call for IP logs to trace the real culprits.  The cyber police did not investigate into the email addresses used to post the comments. Most shockingly, the investigating officer said that comments were not objectionable and no cognizable offence was made out warranting a police investigation.

My mother would often say that NCW, by having the FIR filed in her name made her hold a double edged sword.  In parallel, the cyber onslaught followed as a backlash that she was a woman who wanted to have people jailed.  The Mumbai police failed to determine the motive and conspiracy of this crime. It failed to connect the dots back to  Chandigarh where the divorce had happened and the case files had gone missing and talks of a case having been filed in my name.

 [  However, I read this news item where in a PIL filed by Adv. Purnima Advani in 2015 seeking restraint on politicians from making derogatory remarks against women. The PIL referred to derogatory, abrasive and misogynistic comments made about the the Minister Smirti Irani's character and education by an ex- Minister, Mr. Gurudas Kamat. 

https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/derogatory-comments-on-women-bombay-high-court-issues-notices-to-central-govt-departments-3045164/

Adv. Purnima Advani was advocate of my mother who advised and led the process to NCW and also to file the FIR but did not take up the cause when the arrest in the FIR led to launch of cyber attacks and given that this happened whilst the matter was pending before NCW and Mumbai Police for inquiry/ investigation.] 

Whilst the above cyber abuse was launched from October 9, 2007, MSCW remained a mere spectator. Though 60 days were due to expire, there was no action taken. After reminder from NCW, a notice for hearing was issued on December 3, 2007. On December 6, 2007 my mother received a call from Mrs. Susieben Shah who made attempts to convince my mother to appear before KPMG in- house Committee and offered to chair it. My mother requested her to proceed with the mandate. But at every step, there was an effort by her to delay and drag the inquiry.

On December 11, 2007 KPMG sought adjournment for 4 weeks and it was allowed by Mrs. Susieben Shah.

On December 14, 2007 a FIR was filed by our neighbor Mrs. Shetty at Mahim Police station against one Mr. Rajat Bijur who had created lewd profiles of several women  and posted her number on a website exposing Mrs. Shetty to unsolicited call. It is not known who are the other women who were exposed as only the Police is privy to the information and evidence collected by it.

On December 15, 2007 the police filed the chargesheet for offence under section 354 and 509 of IPC against Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh, Mr. Abizer Diwanji and Mr. Aneesh Maloo. Mr. Avinash Vijayshankar was shown as ‘ Wanted’.

On January 21, 2008 KPMG India appeared before MSCW but the minutes of hearing were not shared. On February 25, 2008 a letter was send by MSCW with summary of allegation of the complainant to KPMG India and seeking their reply. KPMG remained silent. The member secretary of MSCW, Mrs. Vijaylakshmi Bidari Prasanna expressed that only Court intervention can bring some traction as KPMG India was not willing to submit to it’s jurisdiction.

The term of the appointed Committee was due to expire. My mother preferred a writ petition 963/2008 on April 8, 2008 seeking that the MSCW inquiry be expedited. KPMG sought a copy of the minutes of the hearing held on January 21, 2008 which was hurriedly faxed by the counsellor, Mr. Arjun Dangat to KPMG but no copy of it was shared with my mother.

Disputing the contents of the minutes, KPMG filed a counter blast writ petition 1107/ 2008 on April 11, 2008 alleging bias against the chairperson and one Committee member, Ms. Anagha Satpodar.

On July 23, 2008 the matter was heard including the suggestion by KPMG that an inquiry may be done by a retired Judge. The writ petition 963/2008 was admitted and an order was passed directing  the Maharashtra State Women Commission to complete the inquiry within six months as per the terms of reference in the NCW letter dated October 8, 2007 and submit a report.

It was held that no case of bias is made out and the request for stay sought by KPMG India in it’s writ petition 1107/2008 was rejected. KPMG India challenged the interim order in special leave petition 20416/2008 in the Supreme Court.

Since then, nothing has been allowed by way of an inquiry except to keep the matter pending in writ petition and special leave petition which cannot look into the merit of the case. During such pendency the case files in Women Commission went missing. My mother continued to be subject to cyber abuse and harassment.

9.    What never came to be seen and played in the background : 

It is shocking that over last 11 years, there is a similar pattern in the  manner in which her case files were declared as ‘Missing’ or ‘ Not Found’ when she asked for certified copies - be it the original divorce files from Chandigarh Court Or from National Commission for Women, Maharashtra State Women Commission and the Bombay High Court. The 2 writ petitions that she filed – 963/2008 seeking that inquiry by Women Commission be expedited And the criminal writ petition 2928/2013 to expedite criminal Trial and had compelling evidence were caused to be withdrawn or disposed directing her to another forum.

Anything that my mother had to seek or ask or submit was diverted. However, the investigating police and the high - powered Inquiry Committee comprising of advocates in the Women Commission did not connect the dots.

Most of what I write here is also covered by TOI in 2013 – 2014 by a journalist Ms. Clara Lewis. But behind the scene developments are not known to readers including the abrupt discharge of advocates and who have refused to address pertinent queries raised by my mother to facts that came to her knowledge after she took charge to appear in person in early 2014 and also took inspection of case files and in particular missing replies and submissions affirmed and given for filing. As per the Bombay High Court Registry, these were not taken on record for reasons which are not known to my mother.

The behind- the- scene activity being uncovered was seen as such threat that the cyber attacks which till then were abusive and derogatory comments  assumed a larger proportion to that of identity theft and gross invasion of her privacy to somehow break her down and destroy her reputation. 

Whilst the orders in the writ petition are for all to see but what happened behind the scene would never been known to the outside world.  

The first writ petition 963/2008 filed on April 8, 2008 was countered by KPMG India with a writ petition 1107/2008 filed on April 11, 2008 based on a ground that minutes of hearing held on January 21, 2008 were not recorded properly and that KPMG with their counsel had appeared under protest.  The minutes were NOT signed by any member of the Inquiry Committee or Member Secretary.  It was signed by the counselor – Mr. Arjun Dangat and faxed to KPMG on April 10, 2008 but no copy sent to all concerned and affected parties. Mr. Arjun Dangat was also the person who briefed the pleader appointed by MSCW and affirm the affidavit filed by MSCW in Bombay High Court and Supreme Court as respondent in writ petition filed by KPMG. His appointment and conduct has been a subject- matter of scrutiny and disciplinary inquiry since beginning, as informed by various employees of the Women Commission.  His services were abruptly dismissed by MSCW on December 31, 2015 before the Chatwal report was submitted to NCW on April 7, 2016 which named Mrs. Niramla Samant Prabhavalkar and others as being responsible for loss of original documents.

On July 23, 2008  writ petition 963/2008 was admitted and the MSCW was directed to complete the inquiry within 6 months and submit the report.  KPMG India’s writ petition 1107/2008 was tagged with it and their request for stay was rejected as no case of bias was made out against the Inquiry Committee members. However, an advocate present in the Court room  had asked the member of the Inquiry Committee Ms. Anagha Satpodar to recuse on July 23, 2008. To fill up the vacancy, an advocate also from NGO - Majlis  was inducted though there was already a member from same NGO since December 2007. KPMG India through a  letter to MSCW and NCW dated August 22,2008 alleged that Majlis was an organization that was ‘ feminist’ and referred to an article of 2003 written by Ms. Geeta Seshu to support their alleged bias. This was a ground to go to Supreme Court.

KPMG India challenged the interim order  dated July 23, 2008 in the Supreme Court in special leave petition 20416/2008. In the first hearing KPMG counsel sought time to have a dialogue with other side counsel. When my mother’s counsel pointed out that there were material concealment and that notice should be issued, a reference was made that she should not always think like a ‘ Feminist’.

The word ‘Feminist’ had become a key word in this round of the litigation. In the second round in 2014, the key word was ‘ reliefs and adjudication’. To lead to the key word, it appears that the  cause of action was created. Just as my mother’s abrupt termination was arising from a legal advice that KPMG CEO was advised to take by the Board member Mr. Vijay Malhotra.

Supreme Court stayed the MSCW inquiry and send the case back to Bombay High Court in April 2009 as the SLP challenged the interim order. My mother found that adverse orders were passed by the Registrar of Supreme Court  which were not uploaded on the website of the Court till she escalated the matter. These orders were wrong as regards service being incomplete to Respondent MSCW and that my mother as Respondent no. 5 had not filed the reply within the mandated period of 3 weeks. Actually, the service was already completed to all respondents no. 1 – 4 and 6 on October 31, 2008 itself and my mother had filed an affidavit / reply on October 21, 2008 itself but the Department was not able to locate it.

At no stage was it disclosed to the Supreme Court by Respondent MSCW that the term of the MSCW appointed Inquiry Committee had expired on November 30, 2008 itself and hence the plea for stay on the MSCW inquiry proceedings based on an allegation of bias against the members of the Inquiry Committee was not valid. MSCW remained without a Chairperson and Board thereafter since July 2009 or so on account of assembly election. Had this been disclosed, would the order of the Supreme Court be different on April 6, 2009 ?

In May 2009, my mother’s advocate Gayatri Singh send a letter to NCW with a copy of the Supreme Court order dated April 6, 2009 and that the matter would be listed shortly for final hearing before Bombay High Court. However, soon thereafter, she discharged from the case expressing certain difficulty. In 2015, under in a reply under RTI from Bombay High Court, it is stated that the vakalatnama given by mother to Adv. Gayatri Singh is not on the record.

This was the second instance of abrupt discharge by her appointed advocate who had steered her through the process of  going to NCW and which she followed, diligently in trust and faith.

My mother had to appoint new  advocates.  In November  2010, KPMG writ petition was dismissed as ‘infructuous’. Based on legal advice and in consultation, my mother withdrew her writ petition 963/2008 with liberty to prosecute the complaint before NCW. KPMG India did not challenge the order in writ petition 1107/2008 at any stage.

[ In 2015, we learnt that my mother’s affidavit dated October 12, 2010 and the affirmation register itself is ‘Missing’ and the written submission made by her new advocate was ‘ not taken on record’ and hence certified copy were denied ].

In March 2011, NCW confirmed that the case was pending before them and send back by MSCW in December 2010.

In October 2012, Mumbai Mirror deleted the news item dated October 9, 2007 with my mother’s name and photo. It merely stated that inconvenience is regretted.

In November 2012, the Mumbai cyber police moved for an order to block the defamatory blogs that were appearing on certain websites identified by my mother and brought to her knowledge by the residents of the housing society where we resided.  

In early January 2013, the defamatory blogs were blocked. This was followed by TOI expose on January 24, 2013 alongside the news on recommendations by Justice Verma Committee on changes in the laws related to crime against Women. The TOI Impact led to an announcement by NCW that it had found the case files and start an Inquiry which will be completed in a time bound manner. On the same night, my mother received a call from a TOI journalist who said that NCW member, Mrs, Nirmala Samant Prabhavalkar is responsible for the State of Maharashtra and Goa.

[  BEHIND THE SCENE – A RTI application was filed by my mother with Women and Child Ministry seeking status of inquiry against the political appointee in MSCW for sabotage and threat. This RTI was forwarded to NCW in mid- January 2013 seeking action report. Instead, NCW announced at back of the TOI expose through news item dated January 24, 2013  that it would conduct inquiry into my mother’s case having found the case files. ]

On March 21, 2013 NCW passed an order appointing an Inquiry Committee headed by Mrs. Prabhavalkar to conduct an inquiry and submit a report within 60 days.  My mother came to know about this order only under a RTI reply dated September 30, 2013 as she wanted to know the scope and terms on inquiry. This order was passed by NCW on March 21, 2013 only after a revision filed by an accused was admitted by Sessions Court in Mumbai and just before the scheduled hearing of March 22, 2013 by the Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Dadar where the chargesheet filed by NM Joshi Police station on December 15, 2007 and bail being granted to the accused. It was only after the TOI news item in January 2013 that the accused resigned from KPMG India.

In May 2013, my mother received a few calls from a public officer acting on request from the accused who had filed the revision seeking a mediation to settle the matter.  I am privy to this fact and also a message that was send by the wife of the accused sharing her number with my mother. My mother did not call her or the accused at any stage. My mother declined the offer. 

In mid- June 2013, just before the scheduled hearing of revision application by Sessions Court, a news item appeared giving the names of the members of the NCW appointed Committee. At the  hearing held in Sessions Court on revision filed by the accused, the advocate of the accused on being prompted by the accused and his wife, made some vague reference about the character of my mother and that my grandparents should be called. This was objected by the pleader. As the objections were not noted, a complaint was made to the Registrar and also a transfer application which was heard and an order passed in July 2013 and the matter was transferred to another Sessions Judge.

This was the first time my mother and me began to wonder about the role of my grandparents who otherwise were in touch with post divorce and had also personally visited Mumbai in May 2008 and also in 2011 and had given their affidavit which is in custody of the cyber police ( PI – Mukund Pawar in cyber cell and Sr PI Mr. Nandkishore More in cyber police station) since May 2008 but they have never been summoned.  This is also part of the chargesheet filed by the cyber police on August 19, 2014.

KPMG India has been stating that Principal of Natural Justice was not followed. The fact remains that my mother as the complainant was being deprived of her right to present witness statements and evidence and when she did, they went missing repeatedly and no inquiry was conducted by the either MSCW/ NCW despite direction of Women and Child Ministry, New Delhi since March 2010.

10.  2013 – 2014  second round of NCW inquiry having found the case files and again Lost in 2015 after quashing of NCW inquiry :

In November 2013 after taking inspection of documents at NCW and MSCW, KPMG India rushed to the Court aggrieved by an order passed by NCW on October 26, 2013 to amend terms of reference and adjudicate. In this hearing my mother was not called upon to be present.

Instead, a hearing was fixed in New Delhi by the News Broadcasting Standards Authority ( NBSA) on October 25, 2013 as regards a complaint that CNN – IBN had aired a program ‘ Face the Nation’ on May 22, 2013 in which again my mother’s case was referred and that criminal case against Mr. Vikram Uttamsingh was quashed. An order was passed in this case on January 6, 2014 directing CNN- IBN news editor to tender an apology for revealing the name and to remove all links to the said program.

Having taken inspection of all the documents, KPMG India rushed to Bombay High Court against NCW aggrieved by an order passed by NCW on October 26, 2013 to amend terms of  reference and adjudicate and give reliefs.  No copy of this order was annexed. No service was given or proof of service called for. No objections were recorded by the Registry which listed the matter.  No copy of the order was given to my mother by NCW even under an application dated December 12, 2013 under RTI.

My mother was represented by an Advocate recommended by a journalist, Ms. Geeta Seshu who extended active help and even visited our home to meet my mother in mid - 2014. NCW’s legal officer – Mr. Singh made calls from the NCW NRI cell and sought names of advocates in Bombay who they can brief. My mother asked Ms. Geeta Seshu and she suggested couple of names except those who was remotely associated with this case in the first round of litigation ( 2008 - 2010).

However, on January 8, 2014 when matter was listed, another advocate came to my mother and asked for a copy of the writ petition of KPMG India stating that NCW had asked him to represent them. My mother informed him that NCW already had an advocate and someone from NCW legal team was in touch with him.

[   This advocates was aware of the first around of the litigation. He was present in the Court room on July 23, 2008 and had suggested that the the member of the Inquiry Committee, Ms. Anagha Satpodar recuses. ]

Thereafter the matter was listed on several dates but either the Board was discharged or  adjournment was taken by the other side, a fact that can be verified easily from the record. On my mother’s insistence, the Court sought copy of the NCW order dated October 26, 2013. On March 26, 2014 NCW legal officer submitted fax copy of the minutes of the hearing affirmed by her as ‘ True’ but copy of the NCW order dated October 26, 2013 was not produced by NCW. .

On the next date i.e April 23, 2014  my mother had a taken ill and her RBC count fell to a dismal low of 7. She had severe pain. She was advised bed rest of 3 weeks. My mother sent an adjournment application to the KPMG advocate who responded that they had seen the medical certificate and would take a date post vacation on June 24, 2014. On request of my mother and with help of Mr. Bhagvanji Rainiji who offered to help me, I went to the Court and handed over the application for adjournment. But the other side took a u –turn and insisted upon being heard and was allowed. I was told to take notes so that my mother could refer to it and argue on next date. The matter was argued for 2 hours and not being a law student and being my first visit,  I struggled to keep pace and follow the argument. Moreover, there were references to cyber complaint etc which upset me. In the first ever visit to a Court and being caught in this awkwardness in a room full of advocates and with no support from anyone, I felt a sense of helplessness. I raised my hand to counter but was not allowed to say anything except to hear, note and hand over to my mother.

It angered me that my mother was going through all such in last 8 years and had never shared these aspects with me. I wrote a narration of the events of that date and it was sent to the gender sensitization committee. There was no revert. There was lot of calls that my mother received from some lady advocates in Bombay and Delhi to dissuade my mother from making any complaint and seeking a transfer from the said Court.

Thereafter, a chamber hearing was held on June 13,  2014.  KPMG India CEO under an order by the Court dated June 13, 2014 met my mother in July 2014. In the interim, her email was compromised on matrimonial website exposing her to unsolicited mails and phishing. The original case files went missing from June 27, 2014 till found on July 3, 2014 and sent to the chamber of the Judges as there was a hearing on July 4, 2014. 

Whilst KPMG India CEO started with an expression to resolve and was optimistic to resolve, in parallel 3 other persons including 2 advocates  called my mother seeking to take the mandate to talk to KPMG advocate and also to help my mother get a job.  

The talks with KPMG India fell through with no offer being made by KPMG India. The NCW inquiry was quashed by an order dated  August 8, 2014 giving liberty to pursue criminal and cyber case – police cases (State vs the Accused).

 On August 19, 2014 the MSCW legal officer resigned and who was the appointed custodian of the case files that NCW had kept in MSCW office. On same day, the Mumbai cyber police filed a chargesheet in Mumbai Magistrate Court naming one Mr. Ramaswamy. My mother was made aware about the chargesheet being filed only after 5 months i.e in January 2015. This would raise a question about Right, Liberty and Remedy of my mother in the police case ( cyber or criminal) which was noted in the order quashing NCW inquiry.

Though my mother never asked for anything but an inquiry, there was a ground made that NCW passed an order on October 26, 2013 to adjudicate and give reliefs and used to file a writ petition seeking quashing of NCW inquiry in 2014 ( 7 years after having registered a case).

But had anyone seen the order dated October 26, 2013 ?

In September 2014 was a notice pay cheque with 7 years of interest stating that as she had expressed her desire to settle and that in the past that had written to her Advocate Gayatri Singh to collect the dues. My mother has returned the cheque with a detailed letter.

11.    NCW’s hide and seek game over case files – who has benefitted :

The NCW declared the case files as ‘Missing’  in February 2015  after the Central Information Commission directed NCW to provide the information sought under RTI application dated October 12, 2013.

This fact was personally informed by the Chairperson of National Commission for Women who send a message to my mother on January 31, 2015 , reproduced below.

“ NCW – CP

Text : Minkashi, GM. I am in Mumbai today. Are you here ? If so, please call me asap.

Lalitha Kumaramnaglam. Chairperson – NCW”. 31.01.2015. 9.37

She informed my mother that as she was in Mumbai and that she would like to meet her at MSCW office where the files were kept and seen last. But later asked her to meet at Worli.  She assured my mother that she would take up the matter about second time loss of files from office of MSCW at the highest level as it is very serious. She also apprised my mother that she was scheduled to meet the ex- CP of NCW in 2002- 2005. My mother told her that she was her advocate who had set the motion of NCW and FIR into process and later recused citing conflict with the appointed counsel by the other side.  

However, it appears that much of the instances that were created whereby my mother was summoned or approached by others expressing that they wanted to help her cause / cause of the Institution are being portrayed as if my mother had approached and  sought favour to facilitate settlement/ offline closure.

 My mother approached advocates who are seen to be activists and public spirited and are aware of her case and fight. They dissuaded my mother from challenging the Bombay High Court order of August 2014  in the Supreme Court. As  NCW declared the case files as Lost,  the matter was diverted to Delhi High Court by way of a writ petition 5892/2015 seeking restoration of Lost case files and also a copy of the NCW order dated October 26, 2013. In this case also, her advocate recused after an order was passed on August 19, 2015 to issue notice to NCW. My mother argued her own case till the end.

The accused moved a criminal writ petition 1222/2015 in Bombay High Court in April 2015 seeking quashing of the criminal case which as per the order of same Court had quashed the NCW inquiry giving liberty to pursue the criminal case and cyber case.

In the criminal writ 1222/2015 that was filed in March 2015, the Registrar General of Bombay High Court made a reference in September 2017 that in a police case the original informant is not required to be heard and it is between the accused and the State and the prosecutor. Thereafter, the matter was kept for August 2, 2018 and on which date, we were informed that the case files are not found and the department is looking into the matter. The CMIS shows the next date as September 19, 2019.

Neither the police station or the investigating officer or the pleader are willing to say anything.  

As regards the writ petition 5892/2015 in Delhi High Court, a Fact Finding Committee was set up under Mr. O.P. Chatwal ( ex- DIG, CBI) to determine the cause of the loss of files and those responsible for the loss and sabotage. The Chatwal Committee submitted a report to NCW in April 2016 and Delhi High Court took cognizance of it in November 2016. The report said that no order was passed by NCW on October 26, 2013 and hence no copy could be given under RTI application dated December 12, 2013.

On July 19, 2017 Delhi High Court disposed the writ petition giving 12 weeks time to NCW to implement the findings of Chatwal Committee. In February 2018 and again in July 2018, NCW wrote to my mother that ‘ it did not wish to take any action and that much time had elapsed and ex- members had left’.  

 

Can this be the outcome for having followed a course backed by legal advice

All this is not only heartbreaking and disturbing. It has puzzled me that almost all her advocates and advisors wanted her to pursue the criminal case knowing that the case is State vs the Accused and the original informant is left at mercy of the State and the Pleader but did not want the NCW inquiry to proceed.

Though my mother never sought settlement, the entire push was to settle offline. In June 2014 when KPMG India CEO expressed interest, he was advised not to and allow criminal case to proceed and NCW inquiry came to be quashed. 

To ensure that she can be represented, at her own costs my mother appointed a special PP in the Trial Court . Soon thereafter, the accused moved a criminal writ 1222/ 2015 in Bombay High Court and in good faith, the same special PP was appointed in the Bombay High Court. But he discharged from the matter in April 2017 which fact came to be known by my mother from Law & Judiciary in June 2017.  

It is  strange that the reason for discharge is ‘differences with the original informant’    or  ‘ trust deficit’ when the pattern of such discharge by advocates and timing would cause anyone to  wonder.  

Surely, my mother’s ability to maneuver and cut through the evil designs in name of legal defence makes her a difficult person to deal with.  

I am inclined to quote here what the Investigating officers in the criminal case and cyber cases have  said at different point of time in last 11 years : 

·    One of them said that the whole process revolves around 3 Cs. – Compete and if cannot      win, then confuse and if that fails than character assassinate.

·      Another said that did I join the Police for this ?

·      A few said that we are trying our best to help but we are too small in the bigger scheme of things which was termed as the conspiracy.

·     The lady in the Registry often said in my presence that Lawyers have created a web in trying to hide one wrong.

·     When my mother followed up on a complaint the Law& Judiciary also said that it is all done by the lawyers.

·       The Judicial Registrar also made similar comments last year in September 2017.

The question that anyone would ask - If everyone from NCW and Police known the cause and source, then why is no action has been taken against those who have caused the sabotage and unleashed a cyber attack on us ?

12.    Harassment, Harassment and more Harassment since 2015 :

KPMG India is voted as the Best Place for Working Mothers and probably that was also a key influencer for my mother to make a career shift but what she endured was a contrast.

To those who have branded my mother as a False Complainant, have not even seen the complaint. 

And if #MeToo started in USA and creating a stir here since September 2018, it should also be seen that even as my mother spoke up in 2006. Since 2011 there are 2000 women who are fighting a class action suit against KPMG USA for systematic gender harassment and discrimination.

Since 2015, my mother's  email have been hacked and fake profiles have been created using her  email and mobile numbers. Recently, even my mobile number was added to a third party with my phone receiving all kind of alerts and notifications. There have been threats and varying degree of harassment. And amongst all this my mother remained unrelenting and maneuvered through the system to make way and cutting through the legal strategy of the other side.

The cyber investigation also revealed that her email has been compromised ever since she filed complaint with NCW and despite having all the details the Police has been quiet. 

Her efforts were not considered as ‘Brave’. Instead she was labeled as anti- establishment, undesirable and crazy. One has got to be crazy to withstand a fight for 11 years as what was at stake was her identity.

And all that the senior inspector of Mumbai Police had to say is that she should change her name. She asked why ? They said that as it is much abused and targeted.

Or is that the identity thief has achieved the end – purpose of such theft ?

Can this be the outcome of following a Due Process as per legal advice  ?

To be made remediless for having followed legal advice. To strip a victim of an identity of her making.

Instead of acknowledging that my mother has been able to cut through the web created in name of legal defence, my mother was subject to an environment of paranoid  to somehow prove that she is hallucinating.  

Our retort to this is that those who used fabricated documents need to elucidate and look inwards if they were indeed facing the reality – the reality that they had lost the game long back.

Such a battery of lawyers to put down one lady whose complaint is branded as ‘ False’ since 2006. To character assassinate at back of Missing divorce files is a real cheap ploy.

13.   The questions that NCW needs to answer :

NCW having registered the case to do an inquiry and which was also upheld by the Court in orders passed in July 2008 and November 2010, why did it allow a new cause of action in 2013 through an ( alleged) order passed by NCW dated October 26, 2013 per KPMG India ?

NCW did not reply to the RTI dated December 12, 2013 seeking copy of the NCW order dated October 26, 2013.. Had it replied the order passed on August 8, 2014 would be different ? 

Is there any accountability of the institutions and the public offices even after the Delhi High Court order dated July 19, 2017 directing NCW to comply with the findings of the Chatwal Committee ?

In July 2018, NCW responded that MUCH TIME HAS ELAPSED and EX- MEMBERS HAVE LEFT. The delay and drag can be attributed to 2 writ petitions – First in 2008 which was dismissed as infructuous And the second in 2013 based on an order that is concluded by Chatwal Committee as not ever passed ?

This is how a lady at level of a Director with 12 years of experience was treated by a company that has been considered as Best Company for Working Mothers.

On January 12, 2018 the judicial members made an appeal to the Nation to Save Judiciary.

My mother is a victim of the same system as her case files have gone missing again and again and lost in shadow cases with no right of say. To whom should such a victim look up to  ?

In May 2018 Jigna Vora was discharged for her alleged role as key conspirator in Dey murder case because the prosecution was not able to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.  The media queried ‘who will return her precious years lost’ due to the police investigation naming her as suspect.

But why is there silence  about Jigna Vora’s act of naming my mother on Mumbai Mirror page and then calling my mother to apprise her of the abusive, derogatory, humiliating and derogatory comments in sheer sadism and insensitivity ? In this case, Mumbai Police did not name her as a suspect in the chargesheet that they filed after a delay of 5 years and till date.

The irresponsible reporting by Jigna Vora leading to vile, vulgar, offensive and derogatory comments on media and internet blogs appear to be orchestrated and was intended to create a perception for the benefit of the accused.  Jigna Vora knew this well as during her own Trial before the Court she filed an application for in- camera proceeding. But here my mother was repeatedly shamed and humiliated due to the revelation of her identity by Jigna Vora on Mumbai Mirror front page on October 9, 2007. 

If invoking a right leads to such abuse of one’s identity and it’s theft and hacking in violation of  Privacy – is it worth taking the step forward !

The defence of other side has been calling NGO members on the Inquiry Committee ‘feminist’ ; use of word ‘adjudication’ by self created cause of action to file writ petition when my mother has even declined an offline settlement conveyed by officers and members of Women Commission and those claiming to have been approached by the other side advocates AND now the word ‘ Family’. 

Who is this Family being referred to ?   I am her Family and I am writing this.

Those who stand by us are our Family.

My mother's courage to have stood her ground and manuvered her way through despite the opposing forces is commendable.

I would like to end with this quote that my mother would refer to when I deflected and this is how it goes :

 " A little boy and his mother were crossing a River ..

Mother : Please hold my hand , son

Son : No, Mom, you hold my hand

Mother : What's the difference

Son : If I hold your hand and something happens to me, chances are that I may let your hand go but if you hold my hand , I know for sure, you will never let me hand go ..."

My mother has always held my hand through all the odds and challenges. 

I would like to refer to the newslink quoted above - " Women who do not talk, also pay a price . Silence begets injustice. What is the way of breaking the circle ? "

I am making an appeal to help us  in seeking an independent probe into motive and conspiracy behind the 11 years of sabotage of justice through repeated loss of documents from the Courts and NCW/ MSCW and the criminal conspiracy behind repetitive identity abuse and identity theft to usurp our Right to Life and Liberty.

 [  I hope and wish that the right of any citizen to express their views honestly will not meet any backlash as has been the apprehension of many. And that my story will not be pulled down.  It is my story and my version of what I have endured and my mother as she chose to speak up and having followed a Due Process as against #MeToo. None from the activist groups have ever called me or my mother for this story. Instead, my mother was told that she has fought long enough and she should let go. For whom does the bell toll ? ]

Prashant