False Complaints and Misuse of law: Addressing Concerns

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

This Article is written by S Harry Jim Samson. He is an Advocate at Nagercoil District Court, Tamilnadu. He is also an editor trainee at ljrfvoice.com.

Introduction

When a woman faces any of the sexual harassment in a workplace. Under POSH Act,2013 She may file a written complaint to the internal committee or local committee within period of 3 months as per section 9 provided time may be extended for another 3 months if sufficient reason exists.

The first course of action is trying to settle the matter by conciliation under section 10 but monetary settlement shall not be entertained. If there is no settlement, then the next course of action is the Internal Complaint Committee (ICC) or Local Complaint Committee is to conduct an inquiry. In inquiry their maybe three possible outcomes

It is proved that accused may be guilty
It is not proved due to not enough evidence
It is proved that it is false complaint

As there is possibility for false complaint due to office internal politics, personal enmity or misunderstanding etc. Posh act,2013 must also address procedures and farmwork for false complaint and to prevent them.

False Complaint

False complaint is when the complainant or informant wilfully made a or series of false allegations of the accused to the lawful authority to wrongfully harm the accused’s liberty, property or reputation.

False complaint can generally be categorised as three types.

Alleged Event is totally false.
Alleged Event is true, but it is not done by the accused person.
Some of the alleged event is true and some of it is false.

False complaint in workplace

Sexual harassment is defined under section 2(n) defines as includes any one or more of the following unwelcome acts or behaviour (whether directly or by implication) namely: —

Physical contact and advances; or
A demand or request for sexual favours; or
Making sexually coloured remarks; or
Showing pornography; or
Any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.

To understand what are the circumstances in which a false complaint in a workplace arises. Under section 3 of posh act, it explains what are the circumstances in which sexual harassment is considered as sexual harassment in workplace.

Promise of preferential treatment.
Promise of detrimental treatment.
Threatening about employment.
Creating Hostile work environment.
Humiliation that affects health and safety.
And similar other circumstances.

If sexual harassment combined with any of the above-mentioned circumstances. Then it is considered as sexual harassment at workplace. So, for women to register false complaint she may create any of the false sexual allegation in the above-mentioned circumstances. And to invoke false complaint under section 14 the complainant must have malicious intention and merely not having enough evidence to prove is not sufficient to take action against complainant.

Concerns regarding false Complaint against accused

There are many concerns arise when the accused face false complaint that can be addressed chronologically into two types.

During inquiry

One cannot deny the fact that the grievance of the accused person when facing false complaint. And may in addition with loss of pay, damaged reputation within the workplace and may even subject to transfer or suspension with any or all.

After inquiry

If at the conclusion of inquiry, it is decided that the accused is guilty. Only on the Appeal, it is decided that the accused is innocent, and it is a false complaint. Then in between and even after appeal. Criminal charges may still pending which filed against innocent accused which is filed on the recommendation of internal committee at conclusion of inquiry or by the complainant herself.

Concerns regarding false complaint in general.

Misuse of law – Due to protection given buy this act. It may be used as a tool for personal Revenge, professional rivalry, or to escape accountability
Loss of trust – Employees may loss the trust in organisation redressal mechanisms.
Discourage of genuine victim – If the ICC is generally biased toward particular party, then it may lead to discourage genuine victim.
Lack of Interaction – Due to fear of false allegations employees may avoid or limit their interaction with their counterpart gender colleagues.
Hostile work environment – It may lead to a culture with mistrust, rigid and ultimately unproductive employees.

Decided case laws

Bijaya Mishra vs. Union of India (2024)[1]

Background:

The petitioner, Bijaya Mishra, was employed as a professor at the Indian Institute of Management (IIM) Ranchi. She filed a complaint alleging sexual harassment against her colleague, Professor Sasadhar Bera. Following an inquiry, the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) found the complaint to be false and malicious. Consequently, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against her, leading to her removal from service. Challenging this decision, she filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking relief against her termination.

Court’s Findings:

The court observed that the ICC had conducted a thorough inquiry, adhering to the principles of natural justice.
It was noted that the petitioner had failed to provide substantive evidence to support her allegations.
The court emphasized that the POSH Act aims to protect genuine victims of sexual harassment and should not be misused to settle personal scores.
The disciplinary authority had acted within its jurisdiction, and the punishment of removal from service was proportionate to the misconduct established.

Hence the High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the disciplinary action taken against the petitioner.

Shankarlal Namdeo vs. State of Madhya Pradesh[2]

Background:

The petitioner, Sub-Inspector Shankarlal Namdeo, was posted as Head Clerk in the VI th Battalion, Special Armed Force (SAF), Jabalpur. A female colleague, a Head Constable, filed a sexual harassment complaint against him under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act).

Two departmental inquiries conducted in March and June 2024 exonerated Namdeo of the allegations. Despite this, a transfer order dated July 1, 2024, was issued, relocating him to Maihar, approximately 150 km away. The transfer was justified by the authorities on the grounds of ongoing discord between Namdeo and the complainant, citing the pending POSH proceedings.

Court’s Findings:

The transfer was not based on any administrative necessity but was solely due to the pending ICC proceedings.
Section 12 of the POSH Act allows for the transfer of the respondent only upon the recommendation of the ICC, which was absent in this case.
The ICC proceedings had reached a stalemate due to the complainant’s lack of cooperation, not because of any action by the petitioner.
Transferring the petitioner without an ICC recommendation amounted to undue victimization and harassment.

Hence the High Court quashed the transfer order dated July 1, 2024, deeming it unjustified and punitive.

Smt. Meena Gill vs Sh. Pradeep Gupta And Anr[3]

Background:

Respondent Pradeep Kumar Gupta alleged that the petitioner threatened to falsely implicate him in a sexual harassment case during an office dispute over attendance fraud. He filed complaints with superiors and police, citing fear of reputational harm. Later, he sought FIR registration under Section 156(3) CrPC, but the court dismissed it, directing the matter to proceed as a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC.

Court’s Findings:

The Court clarified that Section 506 IPC deals with criminal intimidation in both lesser and graver forms, with intent playing a crucial role.
At the summoning stage, only a prima facie case needs to be established, not the exact intent.
In this case, the complainant’s allegations that the petitioner threatened to falsely implicate him in a sexual harassment case were corroborated by multiple witnesses, all present at the time of the alleged incident.
Their consistent testimonies supported the complainant’s version and justified the issuance of summons.
The learned ACMM rightly found sufficient material for summoning, and the ASJ dismissed the revision petition, holding that the proceedings were neither malicious nor an abuse of process.

The High Court upheld these findings and refused to interfere. The petition was dismissed.

Remedies For False Complaint

There are several criminal and civil remedies available to the respondent/innocent person who is victim of false complaint. Internal committee or local committee have power to award compensation from the woman to innocent accused man and it can be directly reduced from the salary or wage of the woman. Or order transfer the woman or suspend or even terminate.

Here are some of the criminal charges which may filed against women for false complaint :

False Evidence – U/S 227 of BNS. Imprisonment may extent to 7 years and fine upto 10,000 rupees.
Fabricating false evidence – U/S 228 of BNS. Imprisonment may extend to 7 years and fine upto 10,000 rupees.
False statement made under declaration which is by law receivable as evidence – U/S 236 of BNS. Imprisonment may extent to 7 years and fine upto 10,000 rupees.
Destruction of document or electronic record to prevent its production as evidence – U/S 241 of BNS. Imprisonment may extent to 3 years or fine 5000 Rupees or with both.
Dishonestly making false claim in court – U/S 246 of BNS. Imprisonment may extend to two years, and with fine.
False charge of offence made with intent to injure – U/S 248 of BNS. Imprisonment May extend to 5 years, or with fine upto 5 lakhs or with both.
Defamation – U/S 227 of BNS. Simple Imprisonment may extent to two years or with fine or with both or with community service.

Recommendations for ICC to curb false complaint

Compressive polices – ICC should create clearly defined gender-neutral policies with clear mechanisms for redressal and procedures that ensure follows natural justice and existing laws.
Advertisement and training – There should held consistent meetings and organise workshop for training employees and advertise by means of posters and flyers etc regarding POSH act.
Effective inquiry – During inquiry ICC members should strictly follow natural justice. For example. Allow to cross exam the witness and give opportunity to hear both sides.
Auditing – There should timely audit the numbers of complaints filed and orders passed and submit to employer and appropriate government and should be oversighted by third party to ensure accountability of ICC.
Impartial Members – Members of ICC should be impartial during throughout the proceedings and must be independent on decision making without any influence on either party.

Conclusion

It is never man vs woman; it is justice vs injustice. False complaint may be filed regardless of gender or status quo between employees. It is the duty of the government to make provisions to enable the judicial or quasi-judicial to effectively differentiate and identify the genuine cases and false cases. In a workplace ICC or LCC should not see gender or show any favouritism to either party but should see the allegation at the face value and till the entire inquiry stand in a neutral position. It’s no denying that Sexual harassment happens at workplace but there’s a probability of false complaint which creates more fear for men, which might directly affect relationship with women at workpace. It is not only affecting men, but women also get affected by it and it might increase difficulty for womento climb on career ladder.

References

1.THE SEXUAL HARASSMENT OF WOMEN AT WORKPLACE (PREVENTION, PROHIBITION AND REDRESSAL) ACT, 2013 (POSH ACT,2013).

2. Bijaya Mishra vs. Union of India. 2024 Latest Caselaw 12 Jhar.

3. Shankarlal Namdeo vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. 2024 SCC OnLine MP 5512.

4. Smt. Meena Gill vs. Sh. Pradeep Gupta and Anr., on 16 December 2024. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/85937729.

5. THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 NO. 45 OF 2023 (BNS,2023)

[1] 2024 Latest Caselaw 12 Jhar

[2] 2024 SCC OnLine MP 5512

[3] Smt. Meena Gill vs. Sh. Pradeep Gupta and Anr., on 16 December 2024. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/85937729/