Author: Kartikeya Tanna
Publication: Niticentral.com
Date: November 25, 2013
URL: http://www.niticentral.com/2013/11/25/shame-on-colin-gonsalves-prashant-bhushan-161248.html

Given how heated the Tehelka rape scandal got, mostly due to Tarun Tejpal and Shoma Chaudhury’s own stupidity in dealing with it, it was inevitable that some dirt would be thrown at BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi. After all, getting the focus on Modi is the best way for any entity to divert all the attention.

In line with that, Pradeep Sharma, Gujarat IAS officer, appeared on several news channels making extremely wild allegations about the presence of an explicit video clip allegedly involving the lady on whom Amit Shah, former MoS (Home), allegedly ordered surveillance. He then insinuated that Modi feared he might be the person in it.

In addition to his utterances across channels aired gratuitously by TV anchors without any sense of respect for at least the lady’s dignity and privacy, Sharma has referred to this in his affidavit before the Supreme Court. The affidavit is pursuant to an application for direction requesting the Supreme Court to transfer the FIR lodged against him by the Gujarat Police in an alleged illegality (unrelated to this) by him to the CBI.

It is critical to note that, in referring to the presence of a video, there is absolutely no proof or supporting evidence whatsoever. Typically, when an averment is made in an affidavit or pleading before the SC, there must be some document/material evidencing the averment. Pradeep Sharma has absolutely no basis for his wild allegation.

Moreover, this isn’t the first time Sharma made these wild allegations. Back in 2011, in an affidavit alleging victimisation by the Modi Government, Sharma stated that there was a “video of sexual activity” involving the lady “available on an internet website”. Worse, he further stated that he did come across such a video clipping.

All these wholly unsubstantiated allegations were made without any regard for the fact that an affidavit before a court is, and can easily become, a part of the public record. In the first affidavit in fact, the lady was referred to by name. Very rightly, the Supreme Court came down very heavily on Sharma forcing removal of these and other offensive portions from the affidavit.

Not deterred by this reprimand, Sharma has not only reinserted those allegations in his fresh affidavit (without the lady’s name this time), he has also gone on TV channels uttering absolute unsubstantiated rubbish. But that is expected of a person like him.

What is worrying for me personally is that men from my fraternity – his lawyers – have consciously allowed this irreversibly damaging rubbish to be a part of the affidavit. In 2011, Colin Gonsalves represented Sharma and now it is Prashant Bhushan. Neither of these heavyweights thought for one moment that they’re allowing wholly unsubstantiated assertions to be a part of their averments before a court and, thereby, violating the dignity and privacy of the lady in question.

What’s worse? When Supreme Court expressed displeasure over these allegations, Gonsalves reportedly said that Sharma did not intend to “press these averments”. A visibly disgusted Supreme Court replied that they cannot raise averments like this and then say they are not pressing them.

Both Bhushan and Gonsalves have been willfully oblivious to the damage their client is causing to the lady without any evidence. True, as lawyers, their prime duty is towards the client. Much above all the loyalty towards one’s client, however, there is a conscience.

Ironically, both Bhushan and Gonsalves claim themselves to be champions of human rights. As it turns out, they are as much champions of guarding the dignity and privacy of a woman as Shoma Chaudhury is a feminist.