New Delhi, Dec. 22, 2025:Supreme Court of IndiaIn a landmark ruling on the scope of redressal under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (“POSH Act”), has clarified that an aggrieved woman may approach the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) constituted at her own workplace even if the respondent (accused) is employed in a different department or organisation. The judgment was delivered on 10 December 2025 in the case ofDr. Sohail Malik v. Union of India & Another (Civil Appeal No. 404 of 2024).
The appellant, an Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer, had challenged the jurisdiction of the ICC constituted in the Department of Food and Public Distribution, where the complainant — a senior Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer — was posted. He argued that only the ICC of his own department (Department of Revenue) could inquire into the complaint under the POSH Act
SC bench comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi rejected this jurisdictional challenge, holding that the phrase “where the respondent is an employee” in Section 11 of the POSH Act refers to procedure and not to jurisdiction, and does not limit the ICC’s power to hear complaints to the respondent’s own workplace.
Also read – No Direct Employer–Employee Relationship Between Principal Employer & Contract Worker: Delhi HC
The Court highlighted that the definition of “workplace” under Section 2(o) of the Act is broad, covering not just the physical office but any place visited during the course of employment, thereby supporting a wider interpretation. It was observed that restricting complaints to the ICC of the respondent’s organisation would create procedural barriers that undermine the protective purpose of the legislation.
The judgment reaffirmed that the POSH Act is a social welfare legislation aimed at facilitating accessible and effective redress for women. A narrow interpretation — forcing complainants to file complaints before the ICC of the accused’s workplace — would risk creating practical and psychological obstacles for survivors seeking justice.
While the ICC at the complainant’s workplace may conduct the initial inquiry and fact-finding, the Court clarified that any disciplinary action against the respondent remains the responsibility of the employer of the accused, in accordance with relevant service rules. This interpretation preserves the procedural integrity of employment law without diluting the Act’s protective intent.
The SC judgment will have far-reaching implications for inter-departmental and third-party harassment complaints, especially in government and large organisations where employees frequently interact across departmental lines. The judgment ensures that workplace redress mechanisms remain accessible to aggrieved women irrespective of organisational boundaries, reinforcing the objective of safe and inclusive workplaces.
