A friend of the intern (“SJ”) who deposed before three Supreme Court judges on Monday about allegations of sexual harassment against a former Supreme Court judge, told Legally India that several recent news reports about the confidential inquiry were factually inaccurate.

SJ’s friend, who declined to be named but has knowledge of the inquiry and SJ’s deposition on Monday (18 November), told Legally India: “It was a two hour inquiry. The judges asked for all details, and she answered all their questions.”

“She has of course named the judge to the committee,” added the friend. “There was no question of [SJ] telling them [the committee], ‘I don’t want to press charges’, because the committee’s job is not to prosecute anyone, but only to report on this case in detail to the CJI.”

The statement of SJ’s friend directly contradicts several of Tuesday’s press reports, which quoted unnamed sources claiming that SJ “refused” to disclose the judge’s name to the committee and that she told the inquiry that “she did not wish to pursue legal remedies”.

In one of the press reports, unnamed “sources close to the retired judge” claimed that the inquiry would “now have no option but to drop the charges” against the ex-judge.

Other press reports this morning, again quoting unnamed sources, suggested that SJ failed to turn up for the inquiry yesterday (Thursday, 21 November), despite having been expected. Mail Today wrote that the “panel assembled for the meeting and waited for nearly an hour and 45 minutes for the intern to arrive” in vain.

SJ’s friend explained that such reports were inaccurate. “[SJ] was given an option on Monday whether or not she wants to come on Wednesday but she had to return to work [outside of Delhi] where she had taken a long leave already,” he told Legally India. “She informed the committee by email much before that she wouldn’t be coming [on Wednesday].”

SJ released a statement earlier today requesting media to respect her privacy and the confidentiality that was assured to her by the inquiry:

During the meeting, I presented all the details of the case to the Committee. I am confident that the Committee will follow all the different lines of enquiry, and will establish the truth of my statements.

The Committee has assured me complete confidentiality. Some media reports are violating the confidentiality of testimony given by the Committee. They have been distorting facts, and misreporting my statements. Such pernicious and mala fide reporting must cease immediately. I would like to request the media to stop speculating on my communications with the Committee, and continue to respect my privacy.