POSH Act Punishes False Complaints by Women, Not Those Who Instigate Them

Source: Bombay High Court

Why in News?

A Single-Judge Bench of the Bombay High Court at Goa, comprising Justice Dr Neela Gokhale, in the case of Shrinivas Shinde v. Directorate of Skill Development & Entrepreneurship (2026), held that the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) limits penal action under Section 14 to the woman or person who files a false and malicious complaint — and does not extend such liability to a third party who may have instigated that complaint.  

• The court, however, directed that the ICC report be amended to name the instigator explicitly, and held that the petitioner was at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings against him before a competent forum.

What was the Background of Shrinivas Shinde v. Directorate of Skill Development & Entrepreneurship (2026) Case? 

• A female colleague of the petitioner, Shrinivas Shinde (a Low Division Clerk with the Directorate of Skill Development & Entrepreneurship), filed a sexual harassment complaint against him before the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC). 
• The ICC closed the complaint, recording a finding that the complainant had been 'instigated' by an 'unknown person' to file the false complaint. 
• Before the ICC, the female colleague had herself stated that one Dattaprasad Palni, the institute's Principal, had drafted the complaint and compelled her to sign it, threatening her with future harassment if she refused. 
• Shinde challenged the ICC's order before the Industrial Court, seeking initiation of proceedings against Palni for having instigated the false complaint. 
• The matter ultimately came before the Bombay High Court by way of a writ petition.

What were the Court's Observations? 

The court made the following key observations: 

Scope of Section 14 is Limited to the Complainant: 

• Section 14 of the POSH Act empowers the ICC to recommend penal action only against the woman or the person who made the complaint under Section 9(1) or 9(2), as the case may be. 
• The statute does not contemplate any punishment for a third party who instigates a woman to file a false or malicious complaint, or who gives false evidence before the ICC. 

Petitioner's Remedy is Against the Complainant, Not the Instigator: 

• Since the female colleague was the author of the complaint, Shinde could legitimately seek penal action against her under Section 14 of the POSH Act. 
• His prayer to direct disciplinary action against Palni under the POSH Act was held to be misplaced and was accordingly rejected. 
• The court noted that the woman may have been compelled by threats, yet the statute did not provide a mechanism to proceed against the instigator under the POSH Act. 

ICC's Omission Criticised — Report Directed to Be Amended: 

• The court criticised the ICC for recording the instigator as an 'unknown person' even though Palni was named in the complainant's own retraction letter. 
• The ICC was held to have been selectively silent, which the court found impermissible. 
• The ICC report was accordingly directed to be amended to record that Palni had instigated the complainant to file a false sexual harassment case against the petitioner. 

Liberty to Pursue Other Remedies: 

• The court clarified that Shinde was at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings against Palni before a competent forum, if permissible in law, subject to Palni being afforded an opportunity of hearing.

What is the POSH Act, 2013? 

About: 

• The POSH Act is a legislation made by the Indian government in 2013 to deal with sexual harassment that women face at work.  
• It's designed to make sure workplaces are safe for women and to protect them from sexual harassment.  
• According to the Act, sexual harassment can involve things like unwanted physical contact or advances, asking for sexual favors, making inappropriate sexual comments, showing pornography, or any other unwelcome behavior of a sexual nature, whether it's spoken, written, or even gestures.  
• Sexual Harassment at the workplace is dealt by the legislative enactment – The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013, (POSH ACT). 
• Where the victim of Sexual Offence is a minor the legislation that comes into play is The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO). 
• The act sets out obligations for the employer, including the requirement to recognize sexual harassment as “misconduct” under service rules and to set up an internal complaints committee (ICC) in workplaces with 10 or more workers. 

Background of the Act: 

• The Supreme Court in a landmark judgment in the Vishakha and others v. State of Rajasthan 1997 case gave ‘Vishakha guidelines’. 
• These guidelines formed the basis for the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. 
• The SC also drew its strength from several provisions of the Constitution including Article 15 (against discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, and place of birth), also drawing from relevant International Conventions and norms such as the General Recommendations of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which India ratified in 1993. 

Section 14 of the Act: 

Section 14: Punishment for False or Malicious Complaints: 

• Action Against Malicious Complaints: 
  • Section 14(1) addresses the serious issue of false or malicious complaints while incorporating important safeguards: 
    • Establishes criteria for determining malicious intent including knowingly false complaints and forged documents. 
    • Provides that mere inability to substantiate a complaint does not attract punishment. 
    • Requires establishment of malicious intent through proper inquiry procedures before recommending action. 
  • Action Against False Evidence: 
    • Section 14(2) empowers Committees to recommend action against witnesses who provide false evidence or produce misleading documents, maintaining the integrity of the inquiry process.