    

Areas of Expertise  Resources  Events  Clients  Contact Us

Call Us – 7200500221

Case Law on Malicious



Complaint under the PoSH

Act  No Comments

By Hemansh Tandon March 22, 2021 PoSH Views: 698

As we all know, The PoSH law, or the Prevention Of Sexual Harassment(PoSH) Act, was passed
in India in the year 2013 to protect women from sexual harassment in the workplace. The law is
an absolute boon to Indian Women as it shatters several societal notions about workplace
sexual harassment and allows women to voice against sexual crimes in the workplace.
Although the law does not tolerate harassment, there are cases where malicious complaints
have been filed against Managers, Peers, and colleagues for personal vengeance, which is a
misuse of the law. The PoSH Law in India also has defined clauses to protect employees from
malicious complaints.

Here is a case study of a malicious case, and it is a typical example of how the PoSH law in India
works impartially for all employees so that while ensuring sexual harassment is avoided, the law
also protects all employees from malicious complaints.

ANITA SURESH VS UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

OVERVIEW OF THE CASE

In this case,
 a petitioner was reprimanded for using the PoSH law to file a malicious complaint.

Need Help?
This case upheld the morals penned in section 14 of the PoSH Act. This also sent a clear
message that no one can misuse charges of sexual harassment. The PoSH law in India does not
act as a legal immunity but is a guardian of our rights, and when one uses
  it as agarbto abuse

someone maliciously, it also punishes those wrongdoers.
Areas of Expertise  Resources  Events  Clients  Contact Us
Call Us – 7200500221
SECTION 14 OF THE POSH ACT,2013


As discussed earlier, Section 14 is written in the act to create a difference between the correct
and malicious and spiteful complainants. This act says that if the internal committee or the
local committee concludes that the allegations filed against the respondent are false, it may be
recommended to the employer or district officer to take action by the service rules applicable.
This section of the PoSH law helps avoid abuse of the act and penalizes those who have
malevolent intentions.

FACTS OF THE CASE

In this case, Anita Suresh, the petitioner, was an employee in the ESI Corporation in Manesar
and was working there as an assistant director. On 8th July 2011, she filed a written complaint
under the PoSH Act to the direction-general of ESI Corporation alleging that she faced sexual
harassment from her colleague, Mr. Verma. She alleged that he misbehaved and encountered
several sexual advances.

In her written complaint, she mentioned two incidents dated on 7th July 2011, in which she
claimed that while sitting amongst her colleagues, Mr. Verma passed some remarks, which for
the reasons of maintaining decorum she cannot write a filthy language on paper, and also
commented something which indicated sexual advances. Also, in the presence of staff and
other members, he had asked her to come to the male’s toilet to check the shortcomings.

This led to the formation of the PoSH internal complaint committee. Respondent appeared
before the forum, which enquired about the case, and he denied all those charges of the case.
He also added that the complaint was malicious. It was made against him because the
petitioner held a grudge against him as he disposed of official work in her absence.
 
Need Help?
Later the committee examined the eight witnesses, the respondent and the petitioner. On
20th January 2012, the committee held that the exact context of the  dialogue
  between
 
petitioner and respondent could not be established, and offering the benefit of the doubt to
Mr. Areas
Verma,of the complaint
Expertise  wasResources
considered malicious, andthe committee
Events Clients suggested that Us
Contact both
Call Us – 7200500221
the parties may be relocated from their present positions.


But the petitioner called the committee’s report erroneous and believed that relocating the
respondent wasn’t sufficient punishment. She also claimed that on 4th November 2011, the
respondent threatened and coerced her to withdraw her grievances.

Video order from the court dated 28th March 2019 directed ESI Corporation to produce all the
documents, which shall be scrutinized by the court.

During the proceedings, the court observed that the petitioner failed to give names of those
present during the incident mentioned in her complaint. All those employees and staff were
examined who were present on the day when that alleged incident took place, and none of
them supported those allegations.

Due to insufficient evidence, it was held that the writ petition didn’t have any merit. Therefore it
was dismissed as a malicious case, and the petitioner was asked to pay an amount of Rs.
50,000/- to the Delhi Advocates Welfare Trust within 4 weeks.

CONCLUSION

This case has set an example that the laws encoded in the PoSH act are not meant to exploit
the innocent but are written to protect the rights of employees. Though this act was
established to protect the rights of those who faced sexual harassment, in recent years, we
have seen some incidents where some employees have tried to misuse the law for their selfish
motives. Establishing fines on false cases like these would prevent the tarnishing of an
honourable citizen’s image and save valuable time in court.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

 
Need Help?
Hemansh Tandon is a fourth-year law student from Indraprastha University. He is an avid
reader and has a keen interest in writing prose and verses.     

For Areas
moreofinformation
Expertise 
on Prevention of Sexual Harassment(POSH),
Resources  Events 
EAP (Employee
Clients  Contact Us
Call Us – 7200500221
Assistance Programs), D&I (Diversity and Inclusion) offerings by CecureUs , please contact

connect@cecureus.com or call us at +91-7200500221

#Createsafeworkplaces #Harassmentfreeworkplace #Posh #PoSHAct #Poshcom

#Preventionofsexualharassment #Safeworkingconditions #Safeworkplace

Previous Post Next Post

Impact of Bias at Types of Subtle

Workplace Sexism

You May Also Like

 
Need Help?
     

Areas of Expertise  Resources  Events  Clients  Contact Us

Call Us – 7200500221


Blogs PoSH

Prevention of Sexual Harassment—Annual Report Filing FAQ’s

Viji Hari
December 21, 2022

 
Need Help?
 Blogs PoSH
    
Witness- Bystanders – Upstanders
Areas ofViji
Expertise
Hari  Resources  Events  Clients  Contact Us
Call Us – 7200500221
December 15, 2022


Blogs PoSH

What is Sexual Harassment Behaviour in an Office Environment, and What is NOT?

Viji Hari
December 12, 2022

Leave a Reply
 
Need Help?
     

Areas of Expertise  Resources  Events  Clients  Contact Us

Call Us – 7200500221


Name *

Email *

Website

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Submit Comment

About Us

Viji Hari, founder CecureUs, has authored the book, Behind Closed

Cubicles(BCC) and Break the Taboo to increase awareness on the prevention of sexual
harassment and holistic employee wellness.
She has worked with several corporates, devised several training programs, and delivered safe
and secure workplaces with Diversity and Inclusion across organizational levels.  She has served
as an external member of several POSH committees and helps organizations comply with
Sexual Harassment Laws.
 
Need Help?
Recent Posts
Opening the pages to mental health discussions
    
What can an employer do to break the taboo around counselling
TheAreas
Printof– Expertise
Cecureus Posh Survey: An insight
Resources 
intoEvents
Sexual Harassment
ClientsLaws
 Contact Us
Call Us – 7200500221
Prevention
 of Sexual Harassment—Annual Report Filing FAQ’s

Follow us

 FACEBOOK
   TWITTER

   LINKEDIN
   YOUTUBE
   INSTAGRAM

Need Help?

E: connect@cecureus.com
M: 7200500221

Certifications

© 2022 Cecureus - Prevention of Sexual Harassment, Inclusive Diversity, Employee Assistance Program. All Rights
Reserved.

 
Need Help?