Social Media Trial based on Presumption of Guilty

Justice Hurried and Justice Denied - Social Media Trial based on Presumption of Guilty 

Recently, at a literary event held in Patan for six weeks, two writers, both at senior and junior levels, were selected to complete their work to be published in the form of books.  Posters of the selected scholars were displayed all over, one of which the author has also seen on the Facebook wall.  An incident has created a great deal of controversy and hype on social media based on hearsay, as no one could provide an exact account of what happened, but an unsigned complaint purported to be from a third party was posted. Despite the author's best endure, he could not reach the complainant who closed her Facebook perhaps due to trolling. The complaint, though not verifiable, was as follows: 

Confidential Letter! "Before joining the IS residency, I was assured that I would get such an environment here that I would be able to study with a peaceful mind. Now, peace of mind is far away here. Due to a personal act of this man, my security and Nayi Dhara residency program will be questioned. Also, I do not want to leave this program midway because of his wrong act, because the one who is at fault should be punished. This would be justice, and I cannot see anything else happening to me. He was asked to tell me what I want according to my convenience. Either the accused should be sent back or someone should be kept permanently at home for care.

I want something in between. Accused is a senior writer and a mean man. Keeping both these aspects in mind and the respect of Nayi Dhara in mind. If not publicly, but in the presence of some official person sent by Nai Dhara, the accused should apologise to me in writing. He is a big writer. He can write an apology letter with his autographed handwriting. For me, he should give his apology letter in writing, but if he refuses, he should be asked to leave the residence. A formal and personal email letter should be sent to him from Nai Dhara. After some official comes here, only these two options should be kept.

That's an apology to Shivani Gole in writing for your mistake. Otherwise!

Leave Surya Pura House. This will definitely boost my self-respect. The accused should know that not every girl is available to him. Not every girl will keep quiet..."

Despite being confidential nature of the complaint,  it is quite shocking that it was leaked on social media! 

Findings of the Nai Dhara Organisers Committee: 

हम ‘नई धारा’ राइटर्स रेजीडेंसी के बारे में उठाए गए गंभीर मामले के बारे में पूरी संवेदनशीलता से अवगत हैं। हम स्पष्ट रूप से कहना चाहते हैं कि इस प्रकार के सभी मामलों को हम अत्यंत गंभीरता से लेते हैं। हम शिकायतकर्ताओं के लिए एक सुरक्षित और सम्मानजनक वातावरण सुनिश्चित करने के लिए प्रतिबद्ध हैं। शिकायत प्राप्त होते ही हमने तत्परता से निष्पक्ष जांच की प्रक्रिया शुरू की और सावधानीपूर्वक विचार-विमर्श के बाद, हमने इस मामले में आवश्यक कदम उठाए। हमारी जाँच और उसके बाद उठाये गये कदम से शिकायतकर्ता पूर्णतया संतुष्ट हैं।

अपने प्रतिभागियों और व्यापक समुदाय द्वारा नई धारा पर जताए गए विश्वास को हम महत्व देते हैं। आशा है यह वक्तव्य इस गंभीर मामले को लेकर किसी भी तरह की अटकल का अंत करेगा।

Translation imn English

Findings of the Nai Dhara Organisers Committee: 

We are aware of the sensitivity of the serious matter raised about the Nayi Dhara Writers Residency. We would like to state clearly that we take all such matters extremely seriously. We are committed to ensuring a safe and respectful environment for complainants. As soon as we received the complaint, we promptly initiated a fair investigation process, and after careful deliberation, we took the necessary steps in this matter. The complainant is fully satisfied with our investigation and the subsequent action taken.

We value the trust placed in Nayi Dhara by our participants and the wider community. Hopefully, this statement will put an end to any speculation about this serious matter.

Although the accused has every right to take up her complaints at any level to her satisfaction, third parties should stop lynching rather than presuming innocence, a fundamental prerequisite for fairness. Don't hang him high without a trial, like the Americans did to Native Americans.  

PRELIMINARY VIEW ON MEDIA HYPE - SUBJECT TO A FORMAL LEGAL ADVICE

Re: Preliminary Legal Assessment of the Complaint Alleging Inappropriate Touching

Prepared by:

Prof. Suresh Deman

Honorary Director, Centre for Economics & Finance, London

Legal Consultant (Specialising in Discrimination, Defamation, and Criminal Law)

1. Professional Background and Legal Standing

This opinion is rendered in my capacity as an academic and legal consultant with interdisciplinary expertise in economics, game theory, and legal analysis of human behaviour. I have taught in various jurisdictions, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, Poland and New Zealand. My legal education includes focused study in the areas of discrimination law, defamation, and criminal law, with experience representing individuals of both sexes in sensitive legal matters.

I maintain a high sensitivity to all forms of discrimination and reputational harm and offer the following analysis as an impartial observer grounded in legal reasoning and evidentiary standards.

2. Validity and Procedural Concerns Regarding the Complaint

A foundational principle in legal complaints—whether civil or criminal—is that the complaint must originate directly from the complainant and be personally signed or attested. The dissemination of such a complaint into the public domain, especially prior to any formal adjudication or investigation, may give rise to defamation claims against third parties who republish, comment upon, or otherwise contribute to reputational harm in jurisdictions where the material is read or downloaded.

This could amount to actionable defamation under common law and statutory frameworks in multiple jurisdictions, particularly if the allegations are unproven and cause demonstrable reputational injury.

3. Material Allegations and Evidentiary Deficiencies

The core allegation appears to be that the accused "touched" the complainant. However, the complaint, as understood, lacks essential factual clarity and legal sufficiency. Critical questions remain unanswered:

Location – Where did the alleged act take place?

Consent/Invitation – Did the complainant visit the accused’s premises voluntarily or uninvited?

Nature of Contact – Which specific part of the complainant’s body was allegedly touched?

Response to Conduct – Did the complainant object to the touching, and if so, did the accused desist or continue?

Contextual Factors – It is alleged in the social media, if true both parties were consuming alcohol is relevant to establishing the context and mutual conduct.

The absence of these fundamental details renders the complaint vague and procedurally deficient, falling short of what is typically required to initiate formal legal action.

4. Employment Status and Civil Liability

If the complainant were employed by the accused, there might be grounds for alleging workplace harassment under civil law. However, it is understood that no such employment or fiduciary relationship existed. As a result, employment-based claims of harassment are inapplicable.

5. Criminal Liability: Legal Elements and Standard of Proof

In any criminal complaint alleging inappropriate sexual contact or assault, two key elements must be established beyond a reasonable doubt:

Actus Reus (Prohibited Act): Clear evidence of a non-consensual and unlawful physical act.

Mens Rea (Guilty Mind): Intent or recklessness to commit such an act without consent.

The complaint, as it stands, offers no corroborating evidence, such as:

Video or audio recordings;

Eyewitness testimony;

Immediate complaint to the authorities or the institutional body;

Medical or forensic records.

Even if circumstantial evidence were introduced, this matter would be reduced to an assertion against a denial, insufficient under criminal standards, particularly in the absence of corroborative

material or a consistent pattern of conduct.

The claim that the accused may have "tricked" the complainant into physical proximity, without more, does not establish criminal intent under law. A pre-existing acquaintance or presence at social or professional events may further weaken the plausibility of coercion or predatory behaviour in this case.

6. Role of Third Parties and Public Dissemination

It is of concern that third parties—some of whom may have their own biases or unresolved grievances—appear to have used the complaint to advance unrelated agendas. Such conduct risks undermining both the credibility of the complainant and the reputational rights of the accused.

Where no formal adjudication has occurred, this amounts to trial by media or public discourse, a practice that is both ethically and legally dubious. It serves only to inflame tensions and damage reputations, without offering resolution or justice.

7. Conclusion

Based on the evidence and reasoning above, the following conclusions are reached:

The complaint is factually vague, procedurally flawed, and legally insufficient for initiating either civil or criminal proceedings.

The lack of detail, corroborative evidence, and defined context undermines any claim of criminal conduct or sexual assault.

The public circulation of the complaint raises potential defamation liability for third parties.

It is strongly recommended that any further action be handled through formal legal channels, and not through public commentary or informal circulation.

All parties involved deserve to be treated with fairness and dignity. The current handling of the matter by informal actors and commentators only serves to create more animosity and obstruct justice.