TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 1723
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tate and Ms. Meenaz Kakalia, learned Advocate for the Respondent No.2. 3) Record reveals that, by an Order dated 5th October, 2017, this Court had granted ad-interim relief in favour of Petitioner. By a subsequent Order dated 16th January, 2018, Rule was issued in the Petition. The adinterim relief granted by an Order dated 5th October, 2017 was confirmed as interim relief. 4) The Respondent No.2, first informant, has lodged the crime in question on 24th August, 2016 under Sections 354-A and 509 of the IPC. It is stated in the FIR that, she is residing at the address mentioned therein along with her husband. She was working as a Center Manager in Max Life Insurance Company situated at Goregaon Link Road, Bhandup (West), Mumbai for last about one year, prior to lodging of FIR. That, her company's Vice President (H.R.) i.e. the Petitioner herein, stays at Delhi for the office work. He intermittently come to the company's office at the said address for office work. That, on 20th May, 2016 at about 10.00 a.m., the Petitioner had been to the said office for meeting. After meeting at about 2.30 p.m. to 3.00 p.m. in the noon, Petitioner came to the desk of the Respondent No.2. He....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women At Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (for short, 'the POSH Act' ) and the said committee, after conducting detailed inquiry has exonerated the Petitioner from the allegations leveled by the Respondent No.2. He submitted that, various High Courts in India have held that, where the facts giving rise to the criminal complaint have already been investigated by the ICC constituted under the provisions of the POSH Act and have resulted into exoneration of the accused person on merits then a FIR arising out of the same facts cannot be sustained. In support of this contention, he relied on the decisions in the cases of (i) Ashish Chauhan V/s. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Ors. reported in MANU/DE/0549/2023, (ii) L. Sunil Kumar & Ors. V/s. State of Karnataka & Ors. reported in MANU/KA/5130/2018, (iii) B. Narasimhan V/s. State & Ors. reported in MANU/TN/6183/2022 and (iv) Radheshyam Kejriwal V/s. State of West Bengal & Anr. reported in (2011) 3 SCC 581. He submitted that, the present crime is lodged with inordinate delay of 90 days and in view of the law enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Thulia Kali V/s. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssed a detailed email to the Senior Officials of Max Life Insurance Company on 30th May, 2016, complaining about alleged incident and harassment by Petitioner and other two officials. As far as the Petitioner is concerned in her initial complaint dated 30th May, 2016, she has stated that, on 20th May, 2016 at Nahur office, the Petitioner came to her work desk and tore her nameplate with an annoyed look and thrashed it in the dustbin in presence of her colleagues hurting her self respect, dignity and ethical sentiments. It is to be noted here that, the Respondent No.2 did not make any allegation of passing sexual remarks by the Petitioner against her in the said first complaint. 7.1) On the basis of her email dated 30th May, 2023, the ICC was constituted for investigating/inquiry of 23 issues raised by the Respondent No.2 as part of her allegations as per her email. It appears from the record that, the Max Life Insurance Company sought clarification from the Petitioner and other officials while conducting inquiry into the email/complaint dated 30th May, 2016 of the Respondent No.2. 7.2) The Respondent No.2 thereafter approached Boriwali Police Station, Mumbai with a complai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fter conducting detailed investigation into the Complaint made by the father of the Respondent No.2 as contemplated under the provisions of POSH Act, exonerated the Petitioner from the allegations. The said report is annexed at page Nos.101 to 107 to the Petition. 7.8) In these aforenoted admitted facts on record, the Respondent No.2 has lodged present crime with Bhandup Police Station on 24th August, 2016. 8) During the course of investigation of the present crime, police have recorded statements of Mr. Tanveer Khan and Mr. Nirmal Paul i.e. the witnesses referred to by the Respondent No.2 in her FIR. These two witnesses have not supported the version of the informant as far as her allegations of sexual comments made by the Petitioner against her on 20th May, 2016. 9) In her FIR, the Respondent No.2 has stated that, though she had lodged her complaint with the Company, the Company did not take any cognizance of it, is not only contrary to the record and facts as mentioned herein above but also a thoroughly incorrect rather false statement made by her. Respondent No.2 has suppressed the fact that, the Max Life Insurance Company had taken cognizance of the complaints lodged ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirely do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or com....