Why you can trust this course

173. (1) Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, irrespective of the area where the offence is committed, may be given orally or by electronic communication to an officer in charge of a police station, and if given, (i) orally, it shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf; (ii) by electronic communication, it shall be taken on record by him on being signed within three days by the person giving it. (2) A copy of the information as recorded under sub-section (1) shall be given forthwith, free of cost, to the informant [...]. (3) Without prejudice to the provisions contained in section 175, on receipt of information relating to the commission of any cognizable offence, which is made punishable for three years or more but less than seven years, the officer in charge of the police station may with the prior permission from an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, considering the nature and gravity of the offence, (i) proceed to conduct preliminary enquiry to ascertain whether there exists a prima facie case for proceeding in the matter within a period of fourteen days; or (ii) proceed with investigation when there exists a prima facie case.

Schedule (see Section 63) — Certificate. Part A. To be filled by the party or person in charge of the computer or the communication device: (i) description of the electronic record; (ii) [device particulars and identifiers]; (iii) [manner of production]; (iv) hash value of the electronic record (SHA-1 / SHA-256 / MD5) [...]. Part B. To be filled by an expert: (i) I certify that I have examined the electronic record described in Part A [...]; (ii) [technical particulars]; (iii) [confirmation of integrity and hash].

61. Admissibility of electronic or digital record. Nothing in this Adhiniyam shall apply to deny the admissibility of an electronic or digital record in the evidence on the ground that it is an electronic or digital record and such record shall, subject to Section 63, have the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document.

63. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Adhiniyam, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media or semi-conductor memory which is produced by a computer or any communication device or otherwise stored, recorded or copied in any electronic form (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceedings [...]. (2) The conditions [...] are the following, namely: (a) the computer output containing the information was produced by the computer or communication device during the period over which the computer or communication device was used regularly [...]; (b) [regular use for that activity]; (c) [the computer or communication device was operating properly]; (d) [the information reproduced was of a kind regularly fed into the computer]. (4) In any proceeding where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things, that is to say — (a) identifying the electronic record containing the statement and describing the manner in which it was produced; (b) giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that electronic record as may be appropriate for the purpose of showing that the electronic record was produced by a computer or a communication device referred to in clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (2); (c) dealing with any of the matters to which the conditions [...] relate; and (d) purporting to be signed by a person in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) and an expert, shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate; and for the purposes of this sub-section it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it [...]. The certificate shall be submitted in the form prescribed in the Schedule to this Adhiniyam and shall include the hash value of the electronic record.

Companies Act 2013 Section 164 (Disqualifications for appointment of director), key provisions. (1) A person shall not be eligible for appointment as a director of a company, if — [...] (d) he has been convicted by a court of any offence, whether involving moral turpitude or otherwise, and sentenced in respect thereof to imprisonment for not less than six months and a period of five years has not elapsed from the date of expiry of the sentence: Provided that if a person has been convicted of any offence and sentenced in respect thereof to imprisonment for a period of seven years or more, he shall not be eligible to be appointed as a director in any company; [...] (2) No person who is or has been a director of a company which — (a) has not filed financial statements or annual returns for any continuous period of three financial years; or (b) has failed to repay the deposits accepted by it or pay interest thereon or to redeem any debentures on the due date or pay interest due thereon or pay any dividend declared and such failure to pay or redeem continues for one year or more, shall be eligible to be re-appointed as a director of that company or appointed in other company for a period of five years from the date on which the said company fails to do so.

Companies Act 2013 Section 177 (Audit Committee), key sub-sections. (9) Every listed public company and such other class or classes of companies, as may be prescribed, shall establish a vigil mechanism for directors and employees to report genuine concerns in such manner as may be prescribed. (10) The vigil mechanism under sub-section (9) shall provide for adequate safeguards against victimisation of persons who use such mechanism and make provision for direct access to the chairperson of the Audit Committee in appropriate or exceptional cases. Provided that the details of establishment of such mechanism shall be disclosed by the company on its website, if any, and in the Board\'s report. Non-compliance with the Section: on any officer of the company defaulting, a penalty of five lakh rupees; on the company, fine which shall not be less than one lakh rupees but which may extend to five lakh rupees.

Companies Act 2013 Section 178 (Nomination and Remuneration Committee and Stakeholders Relationship Committee), key sub-sections. (1) The Board of Directors of every listed public company and such other class or classes of companies, as may be prescribed shall constitute the Nomination and Remuneration Committee consisting of three or more non-executive directors out of which not less than one-half shall be independent directors. Provided that the chairperson of the company (whether executive or non-executive) may be appointed as a member of the Nomination and Remuneration Committee but shall not chair such Committee. (2) The Nomination and Remuneration Committee shall identify persons who are qualified to become directors and who may be appointed in senior management in accordance with the criteria laid down, recommend to the Board their appointment and removal and shall specify the manner for effective evaluation of performance of Board, its committees and individual directors [...].

The Companies (Accounts) Second Amendment Rules, 2025, notified by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, amended Rule 8 of the Companies (Accounts) Rules, 2014 to expand the Board's Report disclosures relating to compliance under the POSH Act, 2013. The amendment is effective from 14 July 2025. The Board's Report must now include, in addition to the existing disclosure under Section 22 of the POSH Act, the workforce gender composition (number of female, male and transgender employees) and detailed POSH compliance statistics for the financial year (complaints received, complaints disposed of, complaints pending beyond ninety days, and the number of workshops/awareness programmes carried out).

6. (1) A Data Fiduciary shall protect personal data in its possession or under its control, including in respect of any processing undertaken by it or on its behalf by a Data Processor, by taking reasonable security safeguards to prevent personal data breach, which shall include, at the minimum: (a) appropriate data security measures, including securing personal data through its encryption, obfuscation or masking or the use of virtual tokens mapped to personal data; (b) appropriate measures to control access to the computer resources used by the Data Fiduciary or the Data Processor; (c) visibility on access to such personal data, through appropriate logs, monitoring and review; (d) reasonable measures for detection of unauthorised access and its mitigation, including through appropriate measures for continued processing in the event of confidentiality, integrity or availability of personal data being compromised; (e) reasonable measures for continued processing in the event of a personal data breach and enabling the investigation, including through appropriate retention of logs and personal data for a period of one year unless a longer period is required by law; (f) appropriate provisions in the contract entered into between the Data Fiduciary and Data Processor for taking such reasonable security safeguards; and (g) appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure that the reasonable security safeguards are effectively implemented.

8. (1) The Data Fiduciaries and purposes as specified in the Third Schedule shall be deemed to no longer be serving the specified purpose if the Data Principal has, for the time period specified therein, neither approached the Data Fiduciary for the performance of the specified purpose, nor exercised any of her rights in relation to such processing, and the Data Fiduciary shall erase such personal data unless retention is required for compliance with any law for the time being in force. (2) The Data Fiduciary shall, at least forty-eight hours before the time period specified in the Third Schedule expires, inform the Data Principal that unless she takes an action indicating continued use of the specified purpose or exercise of rights, her personal data will be erased. (3) Retention of personal data, traffic data and logs by the Government or its instrumentalities may be for a period as prescribed under the Seventh Schedule for purposes related to sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, public order or similar functions.

Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, notified by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology on 13 November 2025 and published in the Gazette of India on 14 November 2025. Rules (summary of provisions relevant to Internal Committee handling of complaint files): (i) A data fiduciary shall implement reasonable security safeguards to prevent personal data breach, including encryption, access controls, audit logs and retention policies aligned with the purpose of processing. (ii) Personal data shall be retained only for the period necessary for the specified purpose, and deleted or anonymised thereafter unless retention is required by law. (iii) Consent Managers shall retain records of consent for at least seven years. (iv) The Third Schedule prescribes default retention periods for specified sectors. (v) The Data Protection Board of India functions in digital mode; data fiduciaries must be ready to provide electronic records, logs and submissions on short notice.

65B. Admissibility of electronic records. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media produced by a computer [...] shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied [...]. (4) In any proceedings where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things, that is to say, — (a) identifying the electronic record containing the statement and describing the manner in which it was produced; (b) giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that electronic record as may be appropriate [...]; (c) dealing with any of the matters to which the conditions [...] relate, and purporting to be signed by a person occupying a responsible official position in relation to the operation of the relevant device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) shall be evidence [...]. [Repealed with effect from 1 July 2024 by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023.]

Framework for POSH-adjacent D&O and EPLI insurance in India (summary paraphrased from IA Magazine, BimaKavach, PolicyBazaar, SecureNow and HTA Insurance commentary; specific policy terms vary and must be read against actual policy wordings): (i) D&O policies typically address claims made by employees against Directors and Officers arising from executive decisions and management action. Standard D&O policies do NOT usually cover employment-related claims such as harassment, discrimination or wrongful termination without a specific EPLI extension. (ii) EPLI is either an extension to D&O or a standalone policy. EPLI covers legal costs, settlements and judgments in respect of employee or job-applicant claims arising from wrongful termination, discrimination, sexual harassment, retaliation, failure to promote and related employment-practices claims. (iii) Common exclusions across D&O and EPLI: intentional wrongful acts, criminal conduct where mens rea is proved, punitive damages (in some policies), fines and civil penalties imposed by regulators. (iv) Notification protocols: EPLI insurers require prompt notification of complaints, formal proceedings, or regulator inquiries that could give rise to a claim; some policies use a claims-made-and-notified structure that requires notification within the policy year. Failure to notify within the notification window can invalidate coverage. (v) Indian market state as at 2026-09-20: D&O is well-established; EPLI is growing but thinner; standalone EPLI is available from a limited number of insurers; specialist EPLI extensions to existing D&O programmes are more common.

The Industrial Relations Code 2020 (Act 35 of 2020), Ministry of Labour and Employment. Key points relevant to POSH Module 7 (summary from PRS India + Lexology + Wikipedia): (i) The IR Code came into force on 21 November 2025 by notification issued by the Central Government under Section 1(3) of the Code. (ii) On the same date, the Trade Unions Act 1926, the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act 1946, and the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 stood repealed. Rights and proceedings pending under the repealed Acts continue under transitional provisions. (iii) The Industrial Relations (Central) Rules 2026 were notified by the Ministry of Labour and Employment on 8 May 2026, providing the procedural framework for the IR Code. (iv) State-level rules under the Labour Codes are still being finalised in most States as at 20 September 2026. Employers operating across multiple States must attend to both the Central Rules and the State Rules applicable to each place of business. (v) For POSH practitioners, the IR Code framework governs post-inquiry managed separation of a respondent (dismissal for misconduct under the applicable standing orders or service rules read with the Code) and any managed separation of a complainant in a coexistence-untenable scenario (typically a voluntary-separation route rather than dismissal).

IRDAI (Corporate Governance for Insurers) Regulations, 2024 (Notification dated 20 March 2024, effective from that date), consolidated by Master Circular on Corporate Governance issued in May 2024. Key provisions (summary paraphrased from TaxGuru + Lexology + JSA + Gladwin International commentary): (i) Fit & Proper: the criteria are made explicit and standardised across the industry; screening must be documented and auditable; the framework covers not only employees but directors and KMPs of corporate agents. (ii) Board composition: optimum composition of Independent and Non-Executive Directors; minimum three Independent Directors; at least one woman Director; CEO to be Whole-Time Director of the Board. (iii) Chairperson appointment: prior approval of the competent authority (IRDAI) required. (iv) Board meeting quorum: one-third of total strength of the Board or three Directors, whichever is higher. (v) Independent Director resignations/removals: must be intimated to IRDAI within 30 days with reasons. (vi) The obligation is CONTINUING, not merely at the point of appointment; insurers and intermediaries must document their screening process and make it auditable.

Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2026, notified by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology on 10 February 2026, in force with effect from 20 February 2026. Key provisions (summary): (i) "Synthetically generated information" means audio, visual, or audio-visual information that is artificially or algorithmically created, generated, modified or altered using a computer resource, in a manner that such information appears to be real, authentic, or true. (ii) Intermediaries shall, upon receipt of a court order or an appropriate government notice, take down unlawful AI-generated content within three hours. (iii) Intermediaries shall take down non-consensual intimate imagery, including deepfake intimate content and morphed images, within two hours of receipt of a valid notice. (iv) Intermediaries shall ensure that synthetically generated information carries an appropriate disclosure or label, with continuous and clearly visible display for visual content. (v) Intermediaries shall deploy reasonable and appropriate technical measures, including automated tools, to detect and moderate synthetically generated information; reliance on user self-reporting alone is insufficient. (vi) The Rules apply to any platform serving Indian users regardless of the place of incorporation.

The Ministry of Women and Child Development launched SHe-Box 2.0 on 17 June 2026 as an upgraded digital platform for filing and tracking workplace sexual harassment complaints under the POSH Act 2013. Key features (summary from MWCD announcement and SCC Online reporting): (i) Single-window access system for organised, unorganised, public and private sectors. (ii) Integration with the Mission Shakti mobile application on Android and iOS. (iii) Multilingual support extended to 23 languages. (iv) Real-time complaint tracking with automated notifications to the Internal Committee and to the District Officer. (v) Mandatory registration of workplaces with more than ten employees; more than 1,61,000 workplaces registered as of March 2026. (vi) Integration with the Section 22 disclosure stack for reporting.

SHe-Box 2.0 portal (Ministry of Women and Child Development, relaunched 17 June 2026), employer-side workflow. Key features (summary paraphrased from IMPRI + POSH At Work + ComplyPOSH + LawChakra + CecureUs reporting): (i) Workplace onboarding: employers with 10 or more employees must register the workplace on the portal, providing employer details, workplace addresses, and Internal Committee composition. (ii) IC listing: the constituted Internal Committee members (Presiding Officer, employee members, external NGO/expert member, gender ratio) must be listed and updated on the portal. (iii) Annual report upload: employers must upload the signed Section 21 annual report in PDF, DOC or DOCX format, along with proof of delivery/submission to the District Officer and MWCD. (iv) Real-time complaint tracking with automated notifications. (v) As reported by MWCD as at 27 March 2026: 161,000+ workplaces registered; 68,460+ Internal Committees listed; 777 District-level Local Committees listed. (vi) Multilingual support in 23 languages; integrated with Mission Shakti mobile app on Android and iOS. (vii) The Section 22 disclosure stream + Companies (Accounts) 2nd Amendment 2025 Board\'s Report disclosure + BRSR Principle 5 disclosure + SHe-Box 2.0 upload should all reconcile to the same underlying case data.

10. (1) The Internal Committee or, as the case may be, the Local Committee, may, before initiating an inquiry under section 11 and at the request of the aggrieved woman take steps to settle the matter between her and the respondent through conciliation: Provided that no monetary settlement shall be made as a basis of conciliation. (2) Where a settlement has been arrived at under sub-section (1), the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall record the settlement so arrived and forward the same to the employer or the District Officer to take action as specified in the recommendation. (3) The Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall provide the copies of the settlement as recorded under sub-section (2) to the aggrieved woman and the respondent. (4) Where a settlement is arrived at under sub-section (1), no further inquiry shall be conducted by the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be.

11. (1) Subject to the provisions of section 10, the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall, where the respondent is an employee, proceed to make inquiry into the complaint in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to the respondent and where no such rules exist, in such manner as may be prescribed or in case of a domestic worker, the Local Committee shall, if prima facie case exist, forward the complaint to the police, within a period of seven days for registering the case under section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, and any other relevant provisions of the said Code where applicable [...] (4) The inquiry under sub-section (1) shall be completed within a period of ninety days.

12. (1) During the pendency of an inquiry, on a written request made by the aggrieved woman, the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, may recommend to the employer to, (a) transfer the aggrieved woman or the respondent to any other workplace; or (b) grant leave to the aggrieved woman up to a period of three months; or (c) grant such other relief to the aggrieved woman as may be prescribed. (2) The leave granted to the aggrieved woman under this section shall be in addition to the leave she would be otherwise entitled. (3) On the recommendation of the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, under sub-section (1), the employer shall implement the recommendations made under sub-section (1) and send the report of such implementation to the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be.

13. (1) On the completion of an inquiry under this Act, the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall provide a report of its findings to the employer, or as the case may be, the District Officer within a period of ten days from the date of completion of the inquiry and such report be made available to the concerned parties. (2) Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at the conclusion that the allegation against the respondent has not been proved, it shall recommend to the employer and the District Officer that no action is required to be taken in the matter. (3) Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at the conclusion that the allegation against the respondent has been proved, it shall recommend to the employer or the District Officer, as the case may be, (i) to take action for sexual harassment as a misconduct in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to the respondent or where no such service rules have been made, in such manner as may be prescribed; (ii) to deduct, notwithstanding anything in the service rules applicable to the respondent, from the salary or wages of the respondent such sum as it may consider appropriate to be paid to the aggrieved woman or to her legal heirs, as it may determine, in accordance with the provisions of section 15 [...] (4) The employer or the District Officer shall act upon the recommendation within sixty days of its receipt by him.

14. (1) Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at a conclusion that the allegation against the respondent is malicious or the aggrieved woman or any other person making the complaint has made the complaint knowing it to be false or the aggrieved woman or any other person making the complaint has produced any forged or misleading document, it may recommend to the employer or the District Officer, as the case may be, to take action against the woman or the person who has made the complaint under sub-section (1), in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to her or him or where no such service rules exist, in such manner as may be prescribed: Provided that a mere inability to substantiate a complaint or provide adequate proof need not attract action against the complainant under this section: Provided further that the malicious intent on part of the complainant shall be established after an inquiry in accordance with the procedure prescribed, before any action is recommended. (2) Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at a conclusion that during the inquiry any witness has given false evidence or produced any forged or misleading document, it may recommend to the employer of the witness or the District Officer, as the case may be, to take action in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to the said witness or where no such service rules exist, in such manner as may be prescribed.

15. For the purpose of determining the sums to be paid to the aggrieved woman under clause (ii) of sub-section (3) of section 13, the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall have regard to, (a) the mental trauma, pain, suffering and emotional distress caused to the aggrieved woman; (b) the loss in the career opportunity due to the incident of sexual harassment; (c) medical expenses incurred by the victim for physical or psychiatric treatment; (d) the income and the financial status of the respondent; (e) feasibility of such payment in lump sum or in instalments.

16. Prohibition of publication or making known contents of complaint and inquiry proceedings. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Right to Information Act, 2005, the contents of the complaint made under section 9, the identity and addresses of the aggrieved woman, respondent and witnesses, any information relating to conciliation and inquiry proceedings, recommendations of the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, and the action taken by the employer or the District Officer under the provisions of this Act shall not be published, communicated or made known to the public, press and media in any manner: Provided that information may be disseminated regarding the justice secured to any victim of sexual harassment under this Act without disclosing the name, address, identity or any other particulars calculated to lead to the identification of the aggrieved woman and witnesses.

17. Where any person entrusted with the duty to handle or deal with the complaint, inquiry or any recommendations or action to be taken under the provisions of this Act, contravenes the provisions of section 16, he shall be liable for penalty in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to the said person or where no such service rules exist, in such manner as may be prescribed.

18. (1) Any person aggrieved from the recommendations made under sub-section (2) of section 13 or under clause (i) or clause (ii) of sub-section (3) of section 13 or sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 14 or section 17 or non-implementation of such recommendations may prefer an appeal to the court or tribunal in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to the said person or where no such service rules exist then, without prejudice to provisions contained in any other law for the time being in force, the person aggrieved may prefer an appeal in such manner as may be prescribed. (2) The appeal under sub-section (1) shall be preferred within a period of ninety days of the recommendations.

19. Every employer shall, (a) provide a safe working environment at the workplace which shall include safety from the persons coming into contact at the workplace; (b) display at any conspicuous place in the workplace, the penal consequences of sexual harassments; and the order constituting, the Internal Committee under sub-section (1) of section 4; (c) organise workshops and awareness programmes at regular intervals for sensitising the employees with the provisions of the Act and orientation programmes for the members of the Internal Committee in the manner as may be prescribed; (d) provide necessary facilities to the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, for dealing with the complaint and conducting an inquiry; (e) assist in securing the attendance of respondent and witnesses before the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be; (f) make available such information to the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, as it may require having regard to the complaint made under sub-section (1) of section 9; (g) provide assistance to the woman if she so chooses to file a complaint in relation to the offence under the Indian Penal Code or any other law for the time being in force; (h) cause to initiate action, under the Indian Penal Code or any other law for the time being in force, against the perpetrator, or if the aggrieved woman so desires, where the perpetrator is not an employee, in the workplace at which the incident of sexual harassment took place; (i) treat sexual harassment as a misconduct under the service rules and initiate action for such misconduct; (j) monitor the timely submission of reports by the Internal Committee.

2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires (selected, abridged for reference; consult the Act for the complete list): (a) "aggrieved woman" means, (i) in relation to a workplace, a woman, of any age whether employed or not, who alleges to have been subjected to any act of sexual harassment by the respondent; (ii) in relation to a dwelling place or house, a woman of any age who is employed in such a dwelling place or house; (d) "District Officer" means an officer notified under section 5; (f) "employee" means a person employed at a workplace for any work on regular, temporary, ad hoc or daily wage basis, either directly or through an agent, including a contractor, with or, without the knowledge of the principal employer, whether for remuneration or not, or working on a voluntary basis or otherwise, whether the terms of employment are express or implied and includes a co-worker, a contract worker, probationer, trainee, apprentice or called by any other such name; (g) "employer" means, (i) in relation to any department, organisation, undertaking, establishment, enterprise, institution, office, branch or unit of the appropriate Government or a local authority, the head of that department, organisation, undertaking, establishment, enterprise, institution, office, branch or unit or such other officer as the appropriate Government or the local authority, as the case may be, may by an order specify in this behalf; (ii) in any workplace not covered under sub-clause (i), any person responsible for the management, supervision and control of the workplace. (n) "sexual harassment" includes any one or more of the following unwelcome acts or behaviour (whether directly or by implication) namely:, (i) physical contact and advances; or (ii) a demand or request for sexual favours; or (iii) making sexually coloured remarks; or (iv) showing pornography; or (v) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature; (o) "workplace" includes, (i) any department, organisation, undertaking, establishment, enterprise, institution, office, branch or unit which is established, owned, controlled or wholly or substantially financed by funds provided directly or indirectly by the appropriate Government or the local authority or a Government company or a corporation or a co-operative society; (ii) any private sector organisation or a private venture, undertaking, enterprise, institution, establishment, society, trust, non-governmental organisation, unit or service provider carrying on commercial, professional, vocational, educational, entertainmental, industrial, health services or financial activities including production, supply, sale, distribution or service; (iii) hospitals or nursing homes; (iv) any sports institute, stadium, sports complex or competition or games venue, whether residential or not used for training, sports or other activities relating thereto; (v) any place visited by the employee arising out of or during the course of employment including transportation provided by the employer for undertaking such journey; (vi) a dwelling place or a house.

21. (1) The Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall in each calendar year prepare, in such form and at such time as may be prescribed, an annual report and submit the same to the employer and the District Officer. (2) The District Officer shall forward a brief report on the annual reports received under sub-section (1) to the State Government.

22. The employer shall include in its report the number of cases filed, if any, and their disposal under this Act in the annual report of his organisation or where no such report is required to be prepared, intimate such number of cases, if any, to the District Officer.

3. (1) No woman shall be subjected to sexual harassment at any workplace. (2) The following circumstances, among other circumstances, if it occurs or is present in relation to or connected with any act or behaviour of sexual harassment may amount to sexual harassment:, (i) implied or explicit promise of preferential treatment in her employment; or (ii) implied or explicit threat of detrimental treatment in her employment; or (iii) implied or explicit threat about her present or future employment status; or (iv) interference with her work or creating an intimidating or offensive or hostile work environment for her; or (v) humiliating treatment likely to affect her health or safety.

6. (1) Every District Officer shall constitute in the district concerned, a committee to be known as the Local Committee to receive complaints of sexual harassment from establishments where the Internal Committee has not been constituted due to having less than ten workers or if the complaint is against the employer himself. (2) The District Officer shall designate one nodal officer in every block, taluka and tehsil in rural or tribal area and ward or municipality in the urban area, to receive complaints and forward the same to the concerned Local Committee within a period of seven days. (3) The jurisdiction of the Local Committee shall extend to the areas of the district where it is constituted.

7. (1) The Local Committee shall consist of the following members to be nominated by the District Officer, namely:, (a) a Chairperson to be nominated from amongst the eminent women in the field of social work and committed to the cause of women; (b) one Member to be nominated from amongst the women working in block, taluka or tehsil or ward or municipality in the district; (c) two Members, of whom at least one shall be a woman, to be nominated from amongst such non-governmental organisations or associations committed to the cause of women or a person familiar with the issues relating to sexual harassment, which may be prescribed: Provided that at least one of the nominees shall preferably have a background in law or legal knowledge: Provided further that at least one of the nominees shall be a woman belonging to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes or the Other Backward Classes or minority community notified by the Central Government, from time to time; (d) the concerned officer dealing with social welfare or women and child development in the district, shall be a member ex officio. (2) The Chairperson and every Member of the Local Committee shall hold office for such period, not exceeding three years, from the date of their appointment as may be specified by the District Officer.

9. (1) Any aggrieved woman may make, in writing, a complaint of sexual harassment at workplace to the Internal Committee if so constituted, or the Local Committee, in case it is not so constituted, within a period of three months from the date of incident and in case of a series of incidents, within a period of three months from the date of last incident: Provided that where such complaint cannot be made in writing, the Presiding Officer or any Member of the Internal Committee or the Chairperson or any Member of the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall render all reasonable assistance to the woman for making the complaint in writing: Provided further that the Internal Committee or, as the case may be, the Local Committee may, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, extend the time limit not exceeding three months, if it is satisfied that the circumstances were such which prevented the woman from filing a complaint within the said period. (2) Where the aggrieved woman is unable to make a complaint on account of her physical or mental incapacity or death or otherwise, her legal heir or such other person as may be prescribed may make a complaint under this section.

National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India & Ors, (2014) 5 SCC 438 (Supreme Court of India, 2-judge Bench of K.S. Radhakrishnan J and A.K. Sikri J, decided 15 April 2014). Holdings (summary paraphrased from the reported judgment and Translaw CLPR commentary): (i) Transgender persons are recognised as a third gender for the purposes of protection under Part III of the Constitution and all laws of India. (ii) Every person has the right to self-identify her gender identity as male, female, or third-gender; the State cannot compel a person to adopt a particular gender. (iii) The Centre and the States are directed to grant legal recognition of gender identity accordingly. (iv) Transgender persons are to be treated as socially and educationally backward classes and afforded reservations in educational institutions and public appointments. (v) Public-awareness programmes on transgender rights are to be undertaken by the Central and State Governments. (vi) The judgment locates the right to gender identity within Articles 14, 15, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.

Anita Suresh v. Union of India & Ors, W.P.(C) No. 5075/2015 (Delhi High Court, 2015, before Manmohan Singh J). Holdings (summary paraphrased from the reported judgment and Ungender/HSA Legal case briefs): (i) The complainant, an Assistant Director in ESI Hospital Manesar, alleged sexual harassment by a senior officer arising out of alleged incidents on 7 July 2011, with the complaint filed on 8 July 2011. (ii) The Internal Complaints Committee found the allegations unsubstantiated after the complainant could not clearly state the language used, and none of the four witnesses she named corroborated her version. (iii) The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition and imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on the petitioner-complainant for filing a false complaint and misusing the provisions of the POSH Act. (iv) The Court's reasoning is that where a complaint is not merely unsubstantiated but is found to have been made with knowledge of its falsity or with malice, cost consequences follow.

L.S. Sibu v. Air India Ltd (Kerala High Court, 2016). Holdings (summary paraphrased from the reported judgment and Bar and Bench/SSR & Co commentary): (i) An inquiry conducted by an Internal Complaints Committee under the POSH Act is a full-fledged disciplinary inquiry in character, and its findings carry significant consequences for the respondent's employment. (ii) Principles of natural justice apply with full rigour. The respondent must be given a fair opportunity to see and respond to material relied upon against him. (iii) Where a witness statement adverse to the respondent is relied on by the Committee to arrive at a finding, the respondent must be given an opportunity to test that statement in some form of cross-examination. Where direct oral cross-examination is not appropriate, the Committee may permit written cross-examination or moderated questioning. (iv) The Committee cannot use adverse material against a respondent without allowing him a real opportunity to answer it.

Dr Susmita Banerjee v. Kolkata Port Trust & Ors, 2017 SCC OnLine Cal 18079 (Calcutta High Court, 2017). Holdings (summary paraphrased from the reported judgment and Serein/Casemine commentary): (i) The petitioner was a witness to an incident of alleged sexual harassment at her workplace and was subsequently accused of giving false evidence at the ICC inquiry. (ii) The ICC recommended action under Section 14 of the POSH Act on the ground of false evidence. (iii) The Calcutta High Court held that the mere apprehension of falsity is not enough. The ICC must specifically show that the person concerned intentionally and maliciously made a complaint or gave evidence known to her to be untrue. (iv) Since the ICC had made no such specific finding and there was no foundational basis for the accusation, all proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 14 were quashed. (v) This case is the anchor authority for the proposition that Section 14 is a narrow gate, not a default response to a complaint that fails on evidence.

Navtej Singh Johar & Ors v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1; AIR 2018 SC 4321 (Supreme Court of India, 5-judge Constitution Bench of Dipak Misra CJI, A.M. Khanwilkar J, R.F. Nariman J, D.Y. Chandrachud J, Indu Malhotra J, delivered on 6 September 2018). Holdings (summary paraphrased from Supreme Court Observer + iPleaders commentary and the reported judgment): (i) Section 377 IPC, insofar as it criminalises consensual sexual conduct between adults of any gender, is unconstitutional as violative of Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21. (ii) Section 377 remains valid insofar as it criminalises non-consensual sexual acts and sexual acts with animals. (iii) The judgment overrules Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation, (2014) 1 SCC 1. (iv) Sexual orientation is an essential attribute of privacy, integral to identity and dignity, and cannot be a ground for discrimination consistent with the Constitution. (v) The Court expressly recognised the dignity, equality and privacy of LGBTQIA+ persons as constitutionally guaranteed.

Global Health Pvt Ltd v. Local Complaints Committee & Ors (Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, decided 16 September 2019). Holdings and directions (summary paraphrased from reported commentary; consult the full judgment for verbatim text): (i) The employer, Global Health Private Limited, operating Medanta Super Specialty Hospital at Indore, had not constituted an Internal Committee under Section 4 of the POSH Act at the time the complainant approached the Local Committee. (ii) The complaint arose from unwelcome verbal notes of a sexual nature and comments on the complainant's outfits made by the Medical Superintendent. (iii) The Local Committee found the allegations proved. The employer’s failure to act on the LC’s recommendation, and its failure to constitute an IC in the first place, brought Sections 15 and 26 into play. (iv) The High Court directed the employer to pay a sum of Rs 25,00,000 (Rs 25 lakh) as compensation to the complainant, covering pain and suffering, loss of reputation, emotional distress, loss of salary for a period of eighteen months, and deprivation of dignity. (v) The employer was also directed to pay a penalty of Rs 50,000 under Section 26 for having failed to constitute the Internal Committee. (vi) Payment was to be made within eight weeks, failing which interest at 9 per cent per annum would accrue on the unpaid sum. (vii) The reasoning reads Section 15 factor-by-factor, mapping each factor to the evidence of harm before arriving at the composite figure.

Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, (2020) 7 SCC 1 (Supreme Court of India, 14 July 2020, three-judge Bench of R.F. Nariman J, S. Ravindra Bhat J and V. Ramasubramanian J). Holding (summary): The certificate required under Section 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act is a condition precedent to the admissibility of evidence by way of an electronic record. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer is affirmed. The judgment in Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh, insofar as it deleted paragraph 24 of Anvar P.V., is overruled. Where a person is unable to obtain the certificate because it is in the hands of another party or a third party, that person may apply to the court to summon it under Section 65B, Section 165 of the Evidence Act, Order XVI of the CPC or Section 91 of the CrPC as the case may be.

CA Nitesh Parashar v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of India & Ors (Delhi High Court, 5 January 2023). Holdings (summary paraphrased): (i) The petitioner was a qualified Chartered Accountant and elected Vice Chairman of the Faridabad branch of the ICAI Northern India Regional Council. A first complaint against him was filed on 3 June 2022; a second complaint on the same incident was filed on 12 October 2022. He received a hearing notice by email dated 23 December 2022 requiring appearance on 6 January 2023. (ii) The petitioner challenged the ongoing POSH inquiry before the Delhi High Court on the ground that the 90-day period under Section 11(4) of the POSH Act had lapsed. (iii) The Court held that the 90-day timeline is directory in nature. Merely crossing the 90-day period does not automatically vitiate an inquiry conducted by the Internal Complaints Committee, provided the inquiry proceeds with reasonable diligence and complies with the principles of natural justice. (iv) A writ petition seeking to quash an ongoing ICC inquiry solely on the ground of delay does not lie. The petitioner was left to raise the delay ground, if he chose, in an appeal under Section 18 after the ICC concluded its inquiry.

The Supreme Court (Bench: Justices A. S. Bopanna and Hima Kohli) decided Aureliano Fernandes v. State of Goa & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 2482 of 2014, on 12 May 2023. Operative directions (summary, paraphrased from the judgment for reference; consult the full judgment for verbatim text): (i) The Union of India, all State Governments and Union Territories are directed to undertake a time bound exercise to verify whether all the concerned Ministries, Departments, Government organisations, authorities, Public Sector Undertakings, institutions, bodies, etc. have constituted Internal Committees / Local Committees / Internal Complaints Committees, as the case may be, in compliance with the mandate of the POSH Act. (ii) Such authorities shall similarly verify whether the composition of Internal/Local/Internal Complaints Committees is in strict compliance with the provisions of the POSH Act, and that necessary information regarding the constitution of such committees is duly notified, with details of the e-mail IDs and contact numbers, displayed on the website of the concerned authority and updated from time to time. (iii) Necessary information regarding the constitution and composition of the IC/LC/ICC, e-mail IDs and contact numbers of the designated person(s), the procedure prescribed for submitting an online complaint, as also the relevant rules, regulations and internal policies, shall be made readily available on the website of the concerned authority/Institution/organisation. (iv) The State Legal Services Authorities are directed to develop modules to conduct workshops and organise regular awareness programmes to sensitise the authorities/managements/employers, employees and adolescent groups regarding the relevant provisions of the POSH Act. (v) The National Legal Services Authority is directed to take immediate steps to formulate a module for orientation of members of the IC/LC/ICC and to impart training in identification of acts that constitute sexual harassment of women at the workplace.

Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty & Anr v. Union of India, 2023 INSC 920 (Supreme Court of India, 5-judge Constitution Bench of D.Y. Chandrachud CJI, S.K. Kaul J, S.R. Bhat J, Hima Kohli J, P.S. Narasimha J, delivered on 17 October 2023). Holdings (summary paraphrased from the reported judgment and Supreme Court Observer commentary): (i) The right to marry is a statutory right, not a constitutional right; only Parliament can enact recognition of marriage between non-heterosexual couples. (ii) The Special Marriage Act 1954 cannot, on its text, be interpreted to permit same-sex marriage. (iii) The majority recognised a constitutional right of queer persons to a union, though not a right to marry per se. (iv) Transgender persons in heterosexual relationships (a trans man with a cis woman, or a trans woman with a cis man) can marry under existing personal and secular marriage laws. (v) The Court directed the Union Government to constitute a committee to determine the scope of entitlements and benefits for queer couples in unions. (vi) On adoption, cohabitation, banking, insurance and related civil-status benefits, the Court left the matter to the Government committee. (vii) The judgment did not amend the POSH Act; it affirmed the constitutional dignity of LGBTQIA+ persons within the existing statutory framework.

Saikuttan O.N. v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd & Ors (Kerala High Court). Holdings (summary paraphrased from Serein POSH commentary and Business Manager case reporting): (i) The transfer of an alleged harasser during the pendency of a POSH inquiry, as an interim measure, is governed by Section 12 of the POSH Act. (ii) Section 12(1)(a) empowers the Internal Complaints Committee to recommend to the employer the transfer of the aggrieved woman or the respondent to any other workplace, on a written request made by the aggrieved woman. (iii) An employer that transfers the alleged harasser unilaterally, without an ICC recommendation under Section 12, acts outside the statutory scheme. The transfer is procedurally infirm and may be set aside. (iv) The substantive power over interim measures is with the IC. HR-initiated interim actions that bypass the IC are impermissible.

Vineeth V.V. v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd & Ors, 2024:KER:21733 (Kerala High Court, Justice Basant Balaji, 2024). Holdings (summary paraphrased from the reported judgment and Verdictum/LiveLaw commentary): (i) On receipt of a complaint under Section 9, Rule 7(2) of the POSH Rules 2013 requires the Complaints Committee to send a copy of the complaint to the respondent within seven working days. (ii) An ICC that fails to serve a copy of the complaint on the respondent, or that examines witnesses in the respondent's absence without giving him an opportunity to cross-examine, violates Rule 7 and the principles of natural justice. (iii) The concerns of the petitioner about the composition of the Committee (the Presiding Officer facing disciplinary proceedings) were also flagged as material to impartiality. (iv) The inquiry report of the Committee is quashed. The concerned authority shall constitute a fresh Internal Complaints Committee in accordance with the POSH Act and Rules, and the inquiry and all related proceedings shall be conducted afresh, strictly adhering to Rule 7 and to the principles of natural justice, with an opportunity to the petitioner-respondent to be heard.

Kailash S/o Bajirao Pawar v. State of Maharashtra (2025), Supreme Court of India. Holdings (summary paraphrased from reported commentary; consult the full judgment for verbatim text): (i) A compact disc (CD) is an electronic record and is admissible in evidence once the requirements of Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 are satisfied. (ii) Where the electronic record is proved through the special statutory mode under Section 63, the certificate under Section 63(4) is mandatory. Where it is proved through oral evidence or through the examination of the person who created or possesses the record, the certificate may be treated as directory. (iii) It is not strictly necessary for a witness to explain a video or for transcripts of video content to be prepared, as the Court is capable of viewing and interpreting the electronic record itself. (iv) The hash value of an electronic record is synonymous with an electronic fingerprint and provides a sure way of identifying and verifying digital data. (v) Private qualified individuals with skills in computer science and cyber forensics may issue valid certificates; the certifier is not restricted to government-notified examiners.

Andhra Pradesh High Court ruling (June 2025) as reported by Lexology, Pink News, Washington Blade, and GenderGP commentary. Holdings (summary paraphrased from case reporting): (i) A trans woman is a woman for legal purposes. (ii) Women-only protective statutes are to be read as extending to trans women in the absence of specific statutory language excluding them. (iii) The ruling relies on and extends the NALSA doctrine on self-identification (although the 2019 Act as amended in 2026 has moved from self-identification to institutional validation, the AP HC ruling predated the 2026 Amendment). (iv) The specific factual matrix concerned a trans-woman applicant\'s status under a women-specific provision. The court held her entitled to the protection. (v) The Karnataka High Court in a February 2025 ruling reached a similar conclusion in a separate matter. Together the two HC rulings represent the current best reading, though the SC has not yet ruled squarely on whether a trans woman is an "aggrieved woman" under Section 2(a) of the POSH Act.

XXXXXX v. Abraham Mathai & Ors, 2025:KER:57427 (High Court of Kerala, decided 30 July 2025). Holdings (summary paraphrased from Casemine + LiveLaw + Verdictum reporting): (i) Section 9(1) of the POSH Act 2013 requires the aggrieved woman to make, in writing, a complaint of sexual harassment. The requirement is mandatory and jurisdictional. Section 11 empowers the Committee to make inquiry into the complaint. An oral complaint, or a statement in the course of some other proceeding, cannot substitute for the written complaint under Section 9. (ii) Anonymous complaints, whether received by the District Officer, the employer or the Committee, cannot serve as the basis for initiating a POSH inquiry. On the facts, the anonymous complaint received by the District Collector was disowned by the complainant, and the complainant made only oral statements to the Local Committee. The LC nonetheless proceeded to order an apology and compensation of Rs 19,80,000. (iii) The Kerala HC set aside the LC order for want of a written complaint. The LC\'s jurisdiction was not properly invoked. (iv) Separately, and importantly for the substantive definition of sexual harassment, the Court held that creating a hostile work environment absent a sexual nexus does not fall within the POSH Act. Section 3(2)(iv) applies where hostile-environment conduct is in relation to or connected with an act or behaviour of sexual harassment. Where the underlying conduct is not sexual in character, the grievance is a labour dispute, not a POSH complaint.

Aureliano Fernandes six-week nationwide compliance survey directive (Supreme Court of India, 2025 - following the 12 May 2023 base judgment). Holdings (summary paraphrased from Lexology + SSR & Co + DLA Piper GENIE + POSH At Work + JSA Prism reporting): (i) The Supreme Court directed a nationwide, district-wise survey to verify compliance with the POSH Act 2013. (ii) The survey was to be completed within six weeks; deadline 23 September 2025. (iii) All public and private sector employers must ensure: (a) Internal Committees are properly constituted per Section 4 and the Aureliano directions; (b) POSH policies are in place per Section 19(a); (c) awareness measures under Section 19(c) read with Rule 13 are implemented. (iv) Non-compliance may result in regulatory action including refusal of licence renewals by relevant authorities. (v) The synchronised compliance regime integrates: physical verification (district-wise survey), digital transparency (SHe-Box 2.0), and corporate accountability (MCA disclosures including Companies (Accounts) 2nd Amendment 2025 expanded Board\'s Report disclosure). (vi) The three layers operate together, not independently; a compliance gap in any one layer surfaces through the other layers.

X v. Akademi & Ors, 2025:DHC:7501 (High Court of Delhi, decided 28 August 2025). Holdings (summary paraphrased from Verdictum and Ungender reporting and the Indian Kanoon judgment digest; consult the full judgment for verbatim text): (i) The Secretary of the Sahitya Akademi qualifies as an "employer" under Section 2(g) of the POSH Act. The definition of employer is not decided by designation alone. Any person who exercises real control over the workplace, its administration, or its employees may fall within Section 2(g). Accordingly, the Local Committee under Section 6 was the proper forum for the complaint. (ii) Retaliation against a POSH complainant is an independent illegality under the POSH Act. Any adverse employment action taken during the pendency of a sexual harassment complaint, including dismissal, salary stoppage, or pressure to withdraw the allegation, will be subject to strict judicial scrutiny. (iii) The complainant, a woman on probation, was terminated while the complaint was pending before the LC, and despite explicit directions from the LC that no adverse action be taken. The termination was held to be retaliatory and quashed. (iv) The Court ordered the complainant\'s reinstatement with continuity of service, full back wages and all consequential benefits. (v) The judgment operationalises the Section 19 employer duty framework and Section 12 interim relief regime as substantive protections against retaliation, notwithstanding the absence of an express "retaliation" head in the POSH Act itself.

The Supreme Court delivered Vaneeta Patnaik v. Nirmal Kanti Chakrabarti, 2025 INSC 1106, on 12 September 2025. Holdings (summary, paraphrased; consult the full judgment for verbatim text): (i) The three-month period under Section 9(1) of the POSH Act is a strict statutory limitation. The proviso permits an extension not exceeding three months, only on reasons to be recorded in writing. (ii) A complaint filed beyond the three months plus three months window is barred and cannot be entertained by the Internal Committee or the Local Committee. (iii) Direct Nexus Test: Where the complaint alleges a continuing wrong by referring to later administrative actions or service decisions, the Committee must apply a direct nexus test. Only if the later action is directly linked to an overt act of sexual harassment will the cause of action be treated as continuing. (iv) Vague allegations of victimisation in service matters do not, by themselves, convert a stale complaint into a continuing wrong. (v) The decision of the Local Committee finding the complaint time-barred under Section 9 was upheld.

ABC v. Internal Complaints Committee of Akasa Air & Ors, Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 15574 of 2025 (Bombay High Court, decided 3 November 2025). Holdings (summary paraphrased from the reported judgment PDF hosted by Bar and Bench): (i) Section 18 of the POSH Act provides an internal statutory appeal mechanism. Any person aggrieved from the recommendations of an ICC (or the non-implementation of such recommendations) has a right of appeal within 90 days. (ii) The existence of Section 18 does not oust writ jurisdiction under Article 226, but it does substantially confine the scope of writ interference. Writ jurisdiction is reserved for exceptional situations such as (a) glaring violation of the principles of natural justice by the ICC, (b) fundamental procedural irregularity in the ICC's constitution or conduct, or (c) a finding that is arbitrary, perverse, mala fide, or in excess of jurisdiction. (iii) The writ court will not re-appreciate evidence on Section 18-eligible grievances and will not sit as an appellate authority over the ICC's factual findings. (iv) The judicial-review inquiry is confined to the legality of the decision-making process, not the merits of the ICC's factual conclusions.

The Supreme Court delivered Dr. Sohail Malik v. Union of India & Anr., 2025 INSC 1415, on 10 December 2025. Holdings (summary, paraphrased; consult the full judgment for verbatim text): (i) The aggrieved woman has the right to approach the Internal Committee constituted at her own workplace under Section 4 of the POSH Act, even where the respondent is employed in a different Department of the Government, or a different organisation. (ii) The protective object of the POSH Act, read with Section 9, requires the Act to be interpreted in a manner that gives the aggrieved woman convenient and safe access to a redressal forum. Requiring her to approach the IC of the respondent's organisation would be contrary to that object. (iii) Where the IC of the complainant's workplace finds the allegation proved, it shall forward its report to the complainant's employer. Where disciplinary consequences fall on the respondent under his/her own service rules, the disciplinary action is taken by the respondent's employer on the basis of the IC report. (iv) The Court reiterated the broad reading of Section 2(o) "workplace", including physical premises, virtual/online workspaces, places visited by the employee arising out of or during the course of employment (including transportation provided by the employer), client sites and field locations.

Bombay High Court at Goa (Neela Gokhale J), ruling reported by Bar and Bench and SSR & Co POSH Law commentary. Holdings (summary paraphrased from case reporting; the specific neutral citation referenced as 2026:BHC-GOA:849 could not be independently verified against primary source portals and is therefore treated as unverified): (i) An Internal Complaints Committee cannot shield an identified instigator of a false sexual harassment complaint by anonymising that individual as an "unknown source" in its report. Once the ICC has chosen to rely on the complainant's retraction letter and that letter names the alleged instigator, the ICC's selective omission of the name is an error. (ii) The anonymisation error furnishes a valid cause of action for the accused employee to appeal under Section 18 of the POSH Act. (iii) Section 14 of the POSH Act permits action only against the complainant or a witness who makes a false or malicious complaint or gives false evidence. Section 14 does NOT reach a third-party instigator. (iv) The Act is silent on whether and how a person who instigates such a complaint can be held accountable; this is flagged as an unresolved legislative gap.

Vice Chancellor, Lakshmibai National Institute of Physical Education v. Yoga Instructor Complainant (Madhya Pradesh High Court, Division Bench, 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 246). Holdings (summary paraphrased from LiveLaw reporting; consult the full judgment for verbatim text): (i) A Single Judge of the MP High Court had directed the Vice Chancellor of Lakshmibai National Institute of Physical Education (LNIPE) to pay Rs 35 lakh as compensation to a Yoga Instructor complainant, arising from POSH Act proceedings. (ii) On appeal to the Division Bench, the Court set aside the Single Judge’s order. (iii) The Division Bench held that the right to appeal is a substantive right, and quantum-of-compensation orders should not be enforced pending the accused respondent’s appellate remedy under Section 18 of the POSH Act, absent some exceptional reason. (iv) The judgment underscores that a Section 15 quantum recommendation is not automatically self-executing; it operates within the Section 13(3) / Section 13(4) employer-action framework and is subject to Section 18 appeal. (v) The practical implication for practitioners is that quantum orders must anticipate appellate scrutiny; the higher the quantum, the greater the reasoning discipline required in the recommendation.

Dr J. Sundaresan Pillai v. Dr K.K. Seethalakshmi & Ors, 2026:KER:33013 (High Court of Kerala, Division Bench of Anil K. Narendran J and Muralee Krishna S. J, decided 19 May 2026). Holdings (summary paraphrased from Verdictum + SCC Online + Bar and Bench reporting): (i) The appellant, a retired Senior Principal Scientist of CSIR serving as Director of the Integrated Rural Technology Centre (IRTC), challenged the jurisdiction of the ICC on the ground that he was the "employer" under Section 2(g) of the POSH Act, and that only the LC could inquire into a complaint against him. (ii) The Kerala HC held that the overall management powers exercised by the Director were subject to the authority of the Executive Committee and the General Body, which retained ultimate control over the administration and affairs of the institution. (iii) Because the ultimate residual control did not vest in the Director but in a governing body above him, the Director is an "employee" under Section 2(g), not an "employer". (iv) The ICC accordingly has jurisdiction to inquire into the complaint. The writ appeal was dismissed. (v) The ruling reads together with X v. Akademi (Delhi HC 2025) as follows: where the individual himself is the residual controller of the workplace (X v. Akademi facts), Section 2(g) is engaged and LC jurisdiction applies. Where the individual\'s control is subject to a superior governing body (Sundaresan Pillai facts), the individual is employee and ICC jurisdiction applies. The working test is residual ultimate control.

Pune Bar Association v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 599 of 2026 (Supreme Court of India, three-judge Bench, decided 22 May 2026). Holdings (summary paraphrased; consult the full judgment for verbatim text): (i) The requirement under Section 63(4) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 that a certificate accompanying electronic records must disclose the hash value of such records and must contain certification by an expert is constitutional. (ii) The requirement has a legitimate objective of ensuring authenticity and integrity of electronic evidence, and does not impose an unconstitutional burden on litigants. (iii) The expert who signs Part B of the standard-form certificate is not confined to examiners notified under Section 79A of the Information Technology Act 2000. Any individual possessing special skills and expertise in computer science and cyber forensics may validly sign Part B, subject to the Court being satisfied on the expert's credentials on the facts of the case. (iv) The petition was accordingly dismissed.

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Amendment Bill, 2024, introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 2 February 2024 as a Private Member\'s Bill. Substantive amendments proposed (summary paraphrased from India Briefing + POSH At Work + Lexology + Mondaq commentary): (i) Section 9(1) limitation period extension: the current 3-month limitation for filing a complaint (extendable by 3 more months for reasons recorded) would be replaced by a 12-month limitation. This would materially widen the window for complainants to file. (ii) Section 10 conciliation removal: the current provision permitting the Committee, at the aggrieved woman\'s request, to attempt conciliation before initiating inquiry, would be removed. All complaints would proceed directly to formal inquiry under Section 11. (iii) Related amendments to align other Sections with the two principal changes. Status as at 20 September 2026: Bill pending; not passed by Lok Sabha; not received in Presidential assent; Standing Committee referral (if any) not concluded. As a Private Member\'s Bill without Government sponsorship, enactment prospects are uncertain. The Bill also does NOT propose gender-neutral extension, which continues to be discussed but not embodied in this specific Bill.

10. Action for false or malicious complaint or false evidence. — Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at the conclusion that the allegation against the respondent is malicious or the aggrieved woman or any other person making the complaint has made the complaint knowing it to be false or the aggrieved woman or any other person making the complaint has produced any forged or misleading document, or the witness has given false evidence or produced any forged or misleading document, the Committee may recommend to the employer or the District Officer, as the case may be, to take action against the woman or the person who has made the complaint or the witness, as the case may be, including a written apology, warning, reprimand or censure, withholding of promotion, withholding of pay rise or increments, terminating from service or undergoing a counselling session or carrying out community service.

6. Complaint under sub-section (2) of section 9. — Any of the following persons may make a complaint under sub-section (2) of section 9, namely: (a) where the aggrieved woman is unable to make a complaint on account of her physical incapacity, a relative or friend; or a co-worker; or an officer of the National Commission for Women or State Women\'s Commission; or any person who has knowledge of the incident, with the written consent of the aggrieved woman; (b) where the aggrieved woman is unable to make a complaint on account of her mental incapacity, a relative or friend; or a special educator; or a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist; or the guardian or authority under whose care she is receiving treatment or care; or any person who has knowledge of the incident jointly with a relative or friend or a special educator or a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist, or guardian or authority under whose care she is receiving treatment or care; (c) where the aggrieved woman for any other reason is unable to make a complaint, any person who has knowledge of the incident, with her written consent; (d) where the aggrieved woman is dead, any person who has knowledge of the incident, with the written consent of her legal heir.

7. (1) Subject to the provisions of section 11, a complaint of sexual harassment under sub-section (1) of section 9 shall be in writing in six copies along with supporting documents and the names and addresses of the witnesses. (2) On receipt of the complaint, the Complaints Committee shall send one of the copies received from the aggrieved woman under sub-rule (1) to the respondent within a period of seven working days. (3) The respondent shall file his reply to the complaint along with his list of documents, and names and addresses of witnesses, within a period not exceeding ten working days from the date of receipt of the documents referred to in sub-rule (2). (4) The Complaints Committee shall make inquiry into the complaint in accordance with the principles of natural justice. (5) The Complaints Committee shall have the right to terminate the inquiry proceedings or to give an ex parte decision on the complaint, if the complainant or respondent fails, without sufficient cause, to present herself or himself for three consecutive hearings convened by the Chairperson or Presiding Officer, as the case may be: Provided that such termination or ex parte order may not be passed without giving a notice in writing, fifteen days in advance, to the party concerned. (6) The parties shall not be allowed to bring in any legal practitioner to represent them in their case at any stage of the proceedings before the Complaints Committee.

9. Manner of taking action for sexual harassment. — Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at the conclusion that the allegation against the respondent has been proved, it shall recommend to the employer or the District Officer, as the case may be, to take any action including a written apology, warning, reprimand or censure, withholding of promotion, withholding of pay rise or increments, terminating the respondent from service or undergoing a counselling session or carrying out community service.

Quarterly SC / HC POSH case-law digest reference set (as at 20 September 2026): (i) LiveLaw (livelaw.in) - quarterly Supreme Court and High Court roundups; regular POSH-specific reporting; case-tagged search; free-tier plus paid subscription. (ii) SCC Online (scconline.com) - annual and quarterly digests; SCC Online Blog carries frequent POSH commentary; subscription-based full-text access. (iii) Bar and Bench (barandbench.com) - weekly + monthly case reporting; practitioner-focused analysis; comment threads on emerging issues; free-tier plus paid subscription. (iv) Supreme Court Observer (scobserver.in) - case-specific commentary; long-form analysis of Constitution Bench and other significant judgments; strong on background and doctrinal significance; free access. (v) PRS India (prsindia.org) - Bill tracker for pending legislation including the POSH Amendment Bill 2024; Standing Committee report tracking; free access. Every Lead Practitioner should subscribe to at least two sources for POSH coverage on a quarterly cadence (minimum), with monthly cadence for practitioners handling live inquiries.

Reserve Bank of India Master Direction framework relevant to POSH-adjacent Fit and Proper compliance (summary paraphrased from RBI + TaxGuru + CAAlley commentary): (i) The RBI issues Master Directions on all regulatory matters, revised as and when policy changes are notified. (ii) For NBFCs, the Master Direction - Reserve Bank of India (NBFC - Scale Based Regulation) Directions 2023 governs the Fit and Proper regime. (iii) Every NBFC shall put in place "Fit and Proper" criteria for directors, applying the criteria at the time of appointment and on a continuing basis. (iv) Compliance-reporting: a quarterly statement to RBI within 15 days of the close of the respective quarter on change of Directors, together with a certificate from the Managing Director of the NBFC that Fit and Proper criteria in selection of the Directors has been followed. (v) Parallel Fit and Proper frameworks apply to Commercial Banks (RBI Commercial Banks Cybersecurity Directions of 31 July 2026 and related directions), Urban Cooperative Banks (RBI Master Circular 2024 on Board of Directors of UCBs), and Asset Reconstruction Companies (Master Direction - RBI (ARC) Directions 2024). (vi) The RBI framework treats Fit and Proper as an ongoing obligation, not a one-time check.

SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations 2015, Chapter IIIA "Informant Mechanism", inserted by SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) (Third Amendment) Regulations, 2019, notified on 17 September 2019 and effective from 26 December 2019 after transitional-provisions notification. Key elements (summary paraphrased from Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas commentary): (i) Any person may submit a Voluntary Information Disclosure Form (VIDF) to SEBI providing original information relating to insider-trading violations. (ii) SEBI shall keep the informant\'s identity confidential except where disclosure becomes necessary in the course of adjudication or enforcement action; identified informants are entitled to specific protective measures. (iii) Where the information leads to disgorgement of Rs 1 crore or more, the informant is eligible for a reward computed as a percentage of the disgorged amount, subject to a cap. (iv) A culpable informant who voluntarily cooperates may be considered for a reward or settlement notwithstanding the cooperation, subject to the informant complying with any monetary penalty. (v) Anti-retaliation protection: an employer or the person against whom disclosure was made shall not victimise the informant.

SEBI BRSR (Business Responsibility and Sustainability Report) framework, Principle 5 (Human Rights) and BRSR Core assurance schedule. Key provisions (summary paraphrased from EY BRSR Guide + Greenplaces + ICAI Background Material 2024 + Consultivo commentary): (i) BRSR applies to the top 1,000 listed companies by market capitalisation. Reporting is against nine NGRBC principles. (ii) Principle 5 (Businesses should respect and promote human rights) includes a mandatory POSH disclosure sub-table: total complaints on sexual harassment filed during the current FY; total complaints resolved; total complaints pending beyond 90 days; corresponding numbers for the prior FY; confirmation that IC is constituted per POSH Act 2013. (iii) BRSR Core comprises the key ESG attributes that are subject to independent reasonable assurance. Glide path: Top 150 companies from FY 2023-24; Top 250 from FY 2024-25; Top 500 from FY 2025-26; All top 1,000 from FY 2026-27. (iv) BRSR value-chain disclosures follow a parallel glide path with lagged applicability. (v) Prior year comparative data disclosure was optional in the first year of new-tier applicability, to ease transition. (vi) POSH data in BRSR must reconcile with Section 22 annual report and, for listed companies with the Companies (Accounts) 2nd Amendment 2025 obligation, with Board\'s Report gender-composition + granular POSH statistics.

SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Third Amendment Regulations, 2024, notified by the Securities and Exchange Board of India on 12 December 2024, together with SEBI Circular dated 31 December 2024 and FAQs dated 23 April 2025. Key changes (summary paraphrased from Lexology and SEBI FAQ commentary): (i) The fit-and-proper-person criteria for Directors of listed entities are refined and consolidated. (ii) A person is not fit and proper where convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude, economic offences, securities-laws violations or fraud; where an order for winding up has been passed; where declared insolvent and not discharged; or under specified restraining orders. (iii) The pre-Amendment position, under which the mere pendency of a criminal complaint or charge sheet concerning economic offences would automatically disqualify a Director from being considered fit and proper, has been changed. Pendency has been moved from an automatic disqualification to a discretionary factor to be applied by the Board case-by-case, with reasons recorded. (iv) The Amendment does not diminish the ultimate obligation of the Board to be satisfied of the fit-and-proper character of each Director; it structures how the Board reaches that satisfaction where a criminal proceeding is pending but not concluded.

The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 (Act 40 of 2019), assented by the President on 5 December 2019, in force from 10 January 2020. Selected provisions relevant to workplace practice (summary paraphrased from the Act text and Translaw CLPR + Pride Circle commentary): Section 3: No person or establishment shall discriminate against a transgender person on any of nine grounds including denial or discontinuance of employment. Section 10: Every appropriate government and establishment shall take steps to secure the full and effective participation of transgender persons and their inclusion in society. Section 11: No establishment shall discriminate against any transgender person in any matter relating to employment, including recruitment, promotion and other related issues. Every establishment shall ensure compliance with the provisions of the Act, and designate a person to be a Complaint Officer to deal with the complaints relating to violation of the provisions of the Act. Section 12: Right of residence. Definition of "establishment" is wide, covering any company, body corporate, firm, cooperative society, trust, agency or institution owned or controlled by the Central or State Government, and any body corporate or firm or cooperative or trust or agency in the private sector. Complaint mechanism is on notice to the Complaint Officer, with the matter referred to State Human Rights Commissioners or other authorities if unresolved.

The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act 2026, introduced in Lok Sabha on 13 March 2026, passed by Lok Sabha on 24 March 2026, passed by Rajya Sabha on 25 March 2026, Presidential assent 30 March 2026. Key changes (summary paraphrased from PRS India Bill Track + Wikipedia + Harvard Carr-Ryan Center commentary + LiveLaw analysis): (i) The definition of "transgender person" is revised. The self-determination language is removed. Legal recognition now requires evaluation by a medical board and issuance of a certificate by the District Magistrate. (ii) The sub-categories of trans-man, trans-woman (irrespective of whether the person has undergone sex-reassignment surgery, hormone therapy, laser therapy, or other therapy) and genderqueer are removed from the statutory definition. (iii) The certification process is subject to appeal, but the substantive gatekeeping now sits with the medical board and the DM. (iv) Anti-discrimination provisions of the 2019 Act, including Section 11 (workplace duties), are preserved textually but their operation is contingent on the new recognition regime. (v) The Amendment has been criticised by the Harvard Carr-Ryan Center and international human-rights bodies as inconsistent with NALSA and international standards; multiple constitutional challenges are pending before Indian courts. (vi) As at 20 September 2026, the Amendment is the operative statutory text; the 2019 Act as amended is the current law.

The Whistle Blowers Protection Act 2014 (Act 17 of 2014), assented by the President on 9 May 2014, published in the Gazette on 12 May 2014. Enforcement status (as at 20 September 2026): the Act has NOT been notified into force. The Central Government has not issued the requisite Section 1(3) notification bringing the Act into operation. Consequently, the substantive framework of the Act — the competent authority, the disclosure mechanism, the whistleblower protection provisions, the 7-year limitation on complaints, the penalties on the wrongdoer and on the identity-disclosing officer — is inoperative. A private members bill and an amendment bill of 2015 have been under discussion at various points, but neither has advanced to enactment or notification. Practitioners must therefore treat the Act as text-on-paper only, and route whistleblower protection through the operational channels (Companies Act 177, SEBI PIT Chapter IIIA, sectoral regulators, internal policy).