CHENNAI: Sexual harassment of women in workplace, not only seriously harms the victims, but has a serious consequence for women workers as a group, held the Madras High Court and directed the State to conduct fresh investigation regarding the alleged sexual harassment allegation against a police officer.
Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy heard a petition moved by R Mohanakrishnan, superintendent of police Nilgiris, seeking to quash the departmental proceedings recommended by the internal complaints committee (ICC) to the sexual harrasment allegation.
Perusing the documents would make it clear that the witnesses were not examined in the presence of the petitioner and no opportunity was granted to the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses, wrote the judge while setting aside the ICC recommendations.
The judge directed the ICC to hold a fresh inquiry by providing opportunity to the petitioner to cross examine the witnesses.
After the inquiry has completed the ICC should submit a fresh report without reference to the earlier report
And the entire exercise should be completed within 60 days, the judge directed. If the disciplinary authority is of the opinion that a punishment has to be imposed on the petitioner, then a second show cause notice has to be issued and a decision should be arrived only after hearing the petitioner, read the judgment.
"Serious allegations such as rape or continuous molestation or harassment, would be a continuing misconduct every day until the situation is redressed", wrote the judge.
It is necessary to advert to the menace of sexual harassment in the work-place the same not just by a remedial action, but also by implementing measures for prevention and also to provide protection for the victims specifically and to the women workforce in general, wrote the judge.
On December 2022, a junior assistant lodged a sexual harrasment complaint against the petitioner. The complainant stated that the incident happened on April 2018, subsequently two other alleged victims lodged sexual complaints against the petitioner.
Based on the complaints received the ICC conducted an enquiry and initiated departmental proceedings against the petitioner.
The ICC also recommended that the petitioner has to be continued under suspension, till the completion of the departmental proceedings. In the event of revocation of suspension, the petitioner should be transferred to any distant place, outside Nilgiris.
Aggrieved by this recommendations the petitioner moved a petition in High Court.
The petitioner contended that it is a motivated complaint against him since he conducted an audit and submitted a report as the government property was misused by certain officers.
The ICC erroneously entertained the complaint which is allegedly happened 4 years back, hence it is in violation of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, the petitioner contended.
Further, no fair opportunity has been given to him by the ICC and no guidelines have been followed during the inquiry, the petitioner added.