In a significant ruling that may reshape how sexual-harassment complaints are handled across government institutions, the Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the jurisdiction of the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) formed at the aggrieved woman’s workplace to inquire into a complaint-even when the accused employee serves in a different department. The judgment came in the appeal filed by IRS officer Dr. Sohail Malik, who argued that only the ICC in his own department could legally investigate him.
Background
The controversy began after a senior IAS officer alleged that Dr. Malik sexually harassed her on 15 May 2023 at Krishi Bhawan, where she served as Joint Secretary. She later filed an FIR and a separate complaint under the POSH Act before the ICC of the Department of Food and Public Distribution-her workplace.
Read also:- Supreme Court Restores Insolvency Case Against Dhanlaxmi Electricals, Slams NCLAT for Ignoring
Malik challenged this before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), then the Delhi High Court, and finally the Supreme Court. His core argument was that the ICC at the complainant’s department lacked power to investigate him because he belonged to another service and another establishment.
A senior advocate appearing for Malik told the Court that allowing cross-departmental jurisdiction would “cause chaos” and violate the service-rule structure. But the Union Government pushed back, saying such a narrow reading would “defeat the very heart of the POSH Act.”
Read also:- Supreme Court Refuses NCDC's Tax Deduction Claim, Says Dividend and Deposit Interest
Court’s Observations
The Bench led by Justice J.K. Maheshwari spent considerable time examining the purpose of the POSH Act, the structure of complaint mechanisms, and the meaning of the word “workplace.” The judges repeatedly returned to one key theme: the Act is a social-welfare law, meant to remove barriers for women seeking redress.
At one point, the Bench observed, “If the aggrieved woman had to chase the respondent’s office every time, the entire purpose of the POSH Act would collapse.” The Court noted that for many women, navigating unfamiliar departments could create fear, stigma, or even deterrence.
The judgment explains that the term "workplace" under Section 2(o) has been intentionally given a wide definition that includes any place an employee visits in the course of employment. So, insisting that only the ICC of the accused's office could take cognizance would be contrary to the Act’s intention.
Read also:- Supreme Court Replaces Arbitrator After Missed Deadline, Says Mandate Ended Automatically
A particularly important clarification came when the Court distinguished between fact-finding and disciplinary action. The ICC at the complainant’s workplace conducts only the inquiry. Any punishment, if recommended, must still be imposed by the employer of the accused.
“The authority to inquire and the authority to penalise are different,” the Bench remarked, rejecting the argument that the ICC must belong to the respondent’s office.
The Court also acknowledged the real-world dynamics of workplace harassment, noting that compelling the complainant to approach a distant or unfamiliar office could “create further psychological barriers.”
Read also:- Supreme Court Clarifies Police Power to Freeze Bank Accounts in Corruption Cases, Sets Aside Calcutta
Decision
The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed Dr. Malik’s appeal, affirming that:
- ICC proceedings can be initiated at the aggrieved woman’s workplace even if the accused belongs to another department;
- The ICC’s report is a preliminary fact-finding document, which the employer of the accused must act upon;
- The accused may challenge disciplinary proceedings later, but not the jurisdiction of the ICC that conducted the inquiry.
With that, the Court cleared the way for the sealed inquiry report to be considered by the competent authority, ending the dispute at the jurisdictional stage itself.
Case Title: Dr. Sohail Malik vs. Union of India & Anr.
Case No.: Civil Appeal No. 404 of 2024
Case Type: Civil Appeal (POSH Act – Jurisdiction Challenge)
Decision Date: 2025 INSC 1415 (Supreme Court Judgment)
