Inclusion of ICC Jurisdiction

Source: Supreme Court

Why in News? 

The bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi in the case of Dr. Sohail Malik v. Union of India and Another (2025) held that when a woman is subjected to sexual harassment at the workplace by a person who is not part of her own organization, she is entitled to file her complaint before the Internal Complaints Committee of her own workplace. 

What was the Background of Dr. Sohail Malik v. Union of India and Another (2025) Case? 

• The case stemmed from an incident on May 15, 2023, where an IAS officer alleged that the appellant, an IRS officer, sexually harassed her at her workplace in Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi. 
• An FIR was registered following the incident. 
• The aggrieved woman also filed a complaint under the POSH Act before the ICC in her department, the Department of Food and Public Distribution. 
• The appellant challenged the ICC's jurisdiction before the Central Administrative Tribunal, arguing that as an employee of the Central Board of Direct Taxes under the Department of Revenue, only an ICC constituted at his workplace could inquire into the complaint. 
• The Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed his challenge to the ICC's jurisdiction. 
• The appellant then approached the Delhi High Court, which also dismissed his challenge. 
• This led to the appeal being filed in the Supreme Court.

What were the Court's Observations? 

• The Court rejected the narrow interpretation of the word 'workplace', holding that such an interpretation would undermine the POSH Act's remedial social welfare intent by creating significant practical hurdles for the aggrieved woman. 
• The bench observed that if the aggrieved woman had to approach the ICC constituted at the workplace of the respondent for every third-party incident, it would fall short of the Act's protective objectives. 
• The Court noted that the Act does not provide that the respondent must necessarily be an employee of the same workplace where the aggrieved woman works. 
• The expansive definitions enable the ICC constituted at the aggrieved woman's workplace to exercise jurisdiction over an employee of a different workplace. 
• The Court clarified that any person against whom a complaint is filed by the aggrieved woman before the ICC constituted at her workplace is a respondent under the POSH Act. 
• The Court emphasized that under Section 13 of the POSH Act, the ICC has a dual role to conduct the preliminary or fact-finding inquiry under the POSH Act and to act as the inquiry authority in formal disciplinary proceedings. 
• The Court directed that the employer of the respondent, even if it is a different department, must abide by its duties under Section 19(f) of the POSH Act to swiftly cooperate and make available information upon a request by the ICC of the aggrieved woman's workplace.

What is the POSH Act? 

About:  

• The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act of 2013, commonly known as the POSH Act, is landmark legislation designed to protect women from sexual harassment in the workplace. 
• This Act emerged after decades of advocacy by women's organizations and rights activists in India's patriarchal society. 
• The Act was enacted following the Vishaka Guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in 1997. 
• It provides a mechanism for redressal of complaints of sexual harassment and aims to create a safe working environment for women. 
• The Act defines sexual harassment broadly to include unwelcome sexually determined behavior, physical contact, demand or request for sexual favors, sexually colored remarks, and showing pornography.

Objectives of the POSH Act: 

• Prevention: Create awareness and establish mechanisms to prevent sexual harassment. 
• Prohibition: Legally prohibit all forms of workplace harassment. 
• Redressal: Provide effective time-bound grievance redressal mechanism. 
• Protection: Safeguard women's constitutional rights to equality and dignity. 
• Confidence Building: Give female employees confidence in protection mechanisms. 
• Creating Safe Workplaces: Foster harassment-free work environments. 
• Speedy Justice: Reduce judicial workload through efficient complaint resolution.

Jurisdiction of ICC: 

• Section 2(o) of the POSH Act provides a wide and all-encompassing definition of 'workplace', including any place visited by the employee arising out of or during the course of employment. 
• The Court's interpretation clarified that the phrase "where the respondent is an employee" in Section 11 cannot be interpreted to mean that ICC proceedings may only be instituted before the ICC constituted at the workplace of the respondent. 
• A restrictive interpretation would run contrary to the scheme of the Act and its remedial social welfare intent. 
• The ICC constituted at the aggrieved woman's workplace has jurisdiction to inquire into complaints against employees of other workplaces where the harassment occurred at the aggrieved woman's workplace. 
• This interpretation ensures that women do not face practical hurdles in accessing justice and that the protective framework of the POSH Act is effectively implemented.