Quashing of sexual harassment FIR upheld where material improvements, prior complaints, delay and weak witness support showed abuse of process.

Material improvements between the earlier workplace complaint and the FIR, suppression of prior complaints, and weak witness support led the HC to apply quashing principles to a sexual harassment prosecution. The record showed that the employer had constituted an internal complaints committee under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, the complainant had already approached police earlier, and the petitioner had been exonerated in the internal process. The Court also noted delay in lodging the FIR and circumstances indicating mala fide institution. On that combined factual and procedural basis, the FIR and consequent criminal proceedings were quashed as an abuse of process.

---

---

Issues: Whether the first information report alleging sexual harassment and related offences was liable to be quashed on the grounds of material improvements, suppression of earlier complaints and findings of the internal complaints committee, together with delay and mala fide institution.

Analysis: The FIR was found to contain material variations from the earlier complaint made to the employer, with the alleged sexual remarks surfacing only later. The record showed that the employer had taken cognizance of the complaints, constituted an internal complaints committee under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, and the petitioner had been exonerated. The complainant had also approached the police earlier with similar allegations, and the police had treated the dispute as civil in nature. The statements of the cited witnesses did not support the allegations of sexual comments. The delay in lodging the FIR, coupled with suppression of material facts and the overall improvements in the version, brought the case within the categories warranting interference under the principles governing quashing of criminal proceedings.

Conclusion: The FIR and the consequent criminal proceedings were quashed as an abuse of process and the petition was allowed.

---