In Anita Suresh v. Union of India, a woman filed a petition in which she challenged the 2012 order which talked about the Internal Complaints Committee [ICC].

ICC speaks about sexual harassment of women at workplace. It has framed rules, regulations, and procedures for determining the complaints. All these procedures imply basic principles of natural justices.

The woman filed a complaint against her senior regarding sexual harassment at the workplace. The woman also mentioned in her report that her senior committed sexual harassment in 2011 and also misbehaved with her.

In her petition, she asked for proper investigation against the man and requested to prosecute him. 

After the examination, the ICC constituted that the man had denied all the allegations against him. The man said that the complaint filed by the woman was done with malicious intent because he disposed off some work in her absence.

The ICC was not able to find any proof regarding the senior and it recommended that the man and woman should rejoin their present post.

The Delhi HC, after going through the matters and records of ICC said that the complaints of the woman appeared to be erroneous. The Court also said that the woman had claimed that the incident took place in front of the staff but at the time of the investigation, the woman was not able to give even a single name of the person present at the time of the incident. 

The petitioner had not mentioned a few things in the report like:

•    Complaints on the ground of modesty.

•    Petitioner did not disclose alleged comment before the ICC.

The Delhi High Court said that the petitioner’s complaint appeared to be false and was filed with an ulterior motive.

The Delhi High Court imposed a fine of Rs. 50,000 on the woman for filing a false case of sexual harassment against her senior and dismissed her plea.


Chikita Malhotra