Legal provisions involved: Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013; Sections 354, 354D, 506, 509, 201, 204 IPC; Section 67, IT Act, 2000.

Judgement by: Supreme Court

Judge/Bench:  Justice J.K. Maheshwari, Justice Vijay Bishnoi

Facts

The case concerned allegations of sexual harassment made by a senior woman officer against Dr. Sohail Malik, an IRS officer working in a different government department. The incident took place at Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi. Along with criminal proceedings, the complainant filed a complaint under the POSH Act before the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) of her own department. Dr. Malik objected to this and argued that only the ICC of his department could conduct the inquiry.

Key legal provisions

Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013

Issues raised

Whether an ICC of one department has the authority to inquire into a complaint against an employee of another department?

Arguments of the case

The appellant argued that Section 11 limits the ICC’s power to the respondent’s workplace. The complainant contended that such a restriction would make the law ineffective and discourage reporting.

Judgement

The Supreme Court rejected the challenge and upheld the ICC’s jurisdiction. It held that the POSH Act does not restrict inquiries to the respondent’s department. The court emphasized that the law must be interpreted to protect women and ensure access to justice, not to create technical barriers.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.