The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with criminal proceedings against a senior officer accused of sexually harassing a Junior colleague. In a detailed order pronounced on August 28, 2025., Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed the petition of Asif Hamid Khan, who had sought quashing of summons issued against him in a case under Sections 354A and 509 of the IPC.
Background
The case stems from a complaint filed by Shruti Bhardwaj, an officer of the Kashmir Administrative Services, who was then posted in New Delhi. She alleged that Khan, serving as Additional Resident Commissioner, subjected her to repeated harassment at the workplace - ranging from inappropriate remarks about her appearance to coercive attempts at personal meetings.
Although an internal complaints committee under the POSH Act (Prevention of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013) gave Khan a clean chit, Bhardwaj simultaneously lodged an FIR in February 2015. The police twice filed closure reports citing lack of corroborative evidence. But the magistrate disagreed, took cognizance, and issued summons. Khan's revision plea before the Sessions Court was also rejected in 2018.
Court's Observations
In the High Court, Khan argued that once the internal enquiry and police investigations had absolved him, criminal proceedings should not continue. He pointed out that many witnesses had not supported the complainant and that some text messages retrieved from his phone reflected cordial relations.
Read also:- Supreme Court Stays Kerala HC Orders Allowing Bail Condition Relaxation for Anitha R. Nair Amid Fraud Case
Justice Krishna, however, noted that departmental enquiries and criminal trials serve altogether distinct purposes.
She explained, "The standard of proof in departmental proceedings is not the same as that in a criminal trial. The two operate in different spheres and cannot bind one another."
The Judge stressed that the complainant's testimony, along with supporting statements from colleagues, was enough at this stage. She pointed out that several witnesses had confirmed the complainant's distress and disclosures to them.
Read also:- Tenant’s defence struck off, Supreme Court directs ₹10,000 payment to Punjab disaster relief
"Safe work environment, with respect, dignity and decency, are fundamental to gender equality," the order remarked,
adding that the victim's perspective must guide interpretation of conduct that might otherwise appear innocuous to others.
The Decision
Concluding that there was sufficient material to justify summoning Khan, the Court upheld the magistrate’s and sessions court’s orders.
"The sole testimony of the complainant, if of sterling quality, is sufficient to proceed. Here, corroborative statements also exist," the bench observed.
The petition was dismissed, clearing the way for the criminal trial to continue.
Case Title: Asif Hamid Khan v. State & Anr.
Case Number: W.P. (Crl.) 3501/2018 & CRL.M.A. 47419/2018
