21 August 2024 Sexual Harassment >> Workplace/ Professional Related  

In a significant judicial decision of Rohit Satindra Sharma v/s The State of Maharashtra & Another, the Bombay High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings against an individual facing allegations of sexual harassment. The case in question involved C.C.No.1363/PW/2019 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 12th Court, Bandra, which arose from C.R.No.19 of 2019 registered with Bandra Police Station. The petitioner sought to set aside these proceedings, which involved charges under Sections 354, 354A, 323, and 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Case Background:

The complainant, Respondent No.2, had previously been employed as a Head Chef at Tata Global Beverages Ltd. (TGBL) in Bangalore. Prior to this, she worked at a company called Hola Chef, where she was acquainted with the petitioner, who was then employed as Head of Supply. Their professional relationship transitioned into a personal one over time. In December 2018, the petitioner allegedly made unwelcome advances towards the complainant, which she resisted. Following this incident, and after discussing it with her husband, the complainant lodged an FIR with the Bandra Police on January 9, 2019.

Key Arguments and Findings:

The petitioner argued that the relationship between him and the complainant was consensual and that the FIR was lodged with malicious intent. He further claimed that the complainant had previously filed a complaint with TGBL’s Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act). The ICC had dismissed her complaint, suggesting that her allegations were unsubstantiated. According to the petitioner, the FIR was filed only after the ICC's findings were unfavorable to the complainant. The petitioner also contended that the FIR was not maintainable because it was not lodged by TGBL, the employer, as required under the POSH Act. He asserted that the complainant’s failure to disclose the ICC proceedings and the delay in filing the FIR indicated a lack of credibility.

Court’s Observations:

The Bombay High Court noted that the complainant did not mention the ICC's dismissal of her complaint in the FIR. The Court observed that the findings of the ICC revealed a history of a consensual relationship between the parties, which contradicted the allegations of non-consensual advances made in the FIR. The ICC’s findings highlighted that the complainant had multiple opportunities to avoid the petitioner but chose to maintain contact, including checking into hotels with him. The Committee’s conclusion was that the complainant’s allegations were not substantiated, and her complaint was deemed an afterthought, especially after her husband learned of the relationship. The Court further analyzed the FIR and found that it did not prima facie indicate the commission of any cognizable offence. The allegations were deemed improbable given the established consensual nature of the relationship and the lack of substantial evidence supporting the claim of sexual harassment.

Judicial Precedents:

The Court referenced the Supreme Court's guidelines in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (AIR 1992 SC 604) for quashing FIRs. The Court found that the case met the criteria where the allegations were absurd and improbable, and the proceedings appeared to be motivated by personal vengeance.

Additionally, the Court considered the Supreme Court’s observation in Mahmood Ali & Ors. v. State of U.P. (2023 SCC Online SC 950), emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of FIRs in cases where ulterior motives are suspected.

Conclusion:

The Bombay High Court concluded that continuing the criminal proceedings would constitute an abuse of legal process. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, highlighting that the FIR was an attempt to harass the petitioner and was not supported by credible evidence or the necessary legal grounds.

  Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012    Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013