The Supreme Court has clarified that a woman who alleges sexual harassment at her workplace can approach the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) constituted in her own department or organisation, even if the person she accuses works in a different department or workplace. This interpretation ensures that victims are not forced to pursue redressal in unfamiliar or remote forums.
What the Supreme Court Held
The Court explained that Section 9 of the POSH Act permits an aggrieved woman to make a complaint to the ICC at her workplace, and this body has jurisdiction to inquire into the allegation irrespective of where the respondent is employed.
The phrase “where the respondent is an employee” in Section 11 does not restrict jurisdiction to ICCs only at the respondent’s place of employment; it primarily governs how disciplinary action, if any, is to be conducted once the inquiry concludes.
Restricting jurisdiction only to the respondent’s workplace would create procedural and psychological barriers, forcing complainants to approach multiple ICCs based on where the accused works. The Court held that such narrow interpretation would undermine the protective purpose of the Act.
The judgment reinforces the social-welfare objective of the law, ensuring accessible and effective redressal mechanisms for women who have experienced workplace sexual harassment.
Significance
This decision removes a procedural hurdle for complaint-filing under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act), making it easier for aggrieved women to seek justice without being compelled to navigate multiple organisational jurisdictions. It also emphasises that ICC jurisdiction is tied to the complainant’s workplace, and cooperation from the employer of the accused (if different) must be provided under the Act.
