In a significant ruling that clarifies the limits of internal disciplinary powers within professional bodies, the Kerala High Court has set aside the report of an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) constituted by the Kollam Bar Association. The Court held that the ICC had no legal authority under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 to inquire into the complaint against a senior advocate.
The judgment was delivered by Justice P.M. Manoj on January 27, 2026, in a writ petition filed by Advocate E. Shanavas Khan.
Read Also:- Kerala High Court Quashes Suicide Abetment Case, Says Angry Words Alone Don’t Prove Criminal
Background of the Case
The dispute arose from a complaint filed by a young woman advocate alleging sexual harassment during a visit to the petitioner’s residence on June 14, 2024. The visit, according to her, was connected to professional work relating to notarisation of documents.
Following the complaint, the Kollam Bar Association constituted an Internal Complaints Committee under the POSH Act and later suspended the advocate based on the committee’s findings. A criminal case was also registered by the police under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code.
The advocate challenged both the ICC report and the suspension order before the High Court, arguing that the Bar Association had no authority under law to constitute such a committee.
Read Also:-Delhi High Court Rejects Sameer Wankhede’s Defamation Suit Against Netflix Show ‘Ba*ds
Key Legal Question Before the Court
The central issue before the Court was:
Can a Bar Association constitute an Internal Complaints Committee under the POSH Act and act upon its findings?
The petitioner argued that:
- A Bar Association is not an “employer” under the POSH Act.
- The alleged incident took place at a private residence, not a workplace.
- Disciplinary action against advocates lies only with the Bar Council under the Advocates Act.
The respondents contended that:
- The POSH Act has a broad protective scope.
- Bar Associations function as professional bodies and can form ICCs.
- The complainant was entitled to protection under the law.
Read Also:- UGC's 2026 Anti-Discrimination Rules Face Protest by Lawyers Near Allahabad High Court
Court’s Observations
After an extensive review of the POSH Act, the Advocates Act, and previous judicial precedents, the Court made several crucial observations.
The Court noted that:
- Section 4 of the POSH Act permits only an “employer” to constitute an ICC.
- A Bar Association does not qualify as an employer under the Act.
- Advocates are governed by the Bar Council under the Advocates Act, not by Bar Associations.
- Merely because an association is registered or functions for welfare purposes, it does not gain disciplinary powers under the POSH framework.
“The Bar Association cannot be treated as an employer for the purpose of Section 4 of the POSH Act,” the Court observed.
The Court also clarified that although the allegations may be serious, jurisdiction cannot be assumed in the absence of statutory authority.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Sets Aside Odisha Land Dispute Orders, Says Section 47 CPC Misused After Decree
On the ICC Report and Suspension
The Court held that since the ICC itself was not legally constituted, its report had no legal standing.
As a consequence:
- The ICC report was set aside.
- The disciplinary action based on that report, including suspension, could not be sustained.
However, the Court made it clear that:
- The ruling does not decide the truth or falsity of the allegations.
- Criminal proceedings, if any, may continue independently.
- The Bar Council of Kerala remains the competent authority to examine professional misconduct.
Court’s Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition and ruled:
- The Internal Complaints Committee formed by the Kollam Bar Association was invalid in law.
- The ICC report against the advocate was quashed.
- All further actions based solely on that report were rendered unsustainable.
Read Also:- SC Questions Delay in NCB Appeal, Seeks Presence of Top Officials in Heroin Bail Case
“The constitution of the ICC itself being contrary to the statute, the report cannot survive in the eyes of law,” the Court concluded.
Case Title: E. Shanavas Khan v. Kollam Bar Association & Ors.
Case Number: WP(C) No. 39539 of 2024
Decision Date: January 27, 2026
