Industrial Court Order On ICC Findings Quashed | HC

Case Details: Vinod Narayan Kachave vs. Presiding Officer (ICC) - [2025] 181 taxmann.com 527 (HC - Bombay)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Sandeep V. Marne, J.
• Ms. Sana Raees Khan, Juhi Kadu & Ms. Sanskriti Yagnik for the Petitioner.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the petitioner, an employee of respondent-employer, was proceeded against on a complaint by a female colleague alleging three incidents:

(i) petitioner commented on complainant’s hair and sang a song relating to her hair;

(ii) petitioner made remarks about a male colleague’s private parts in a common forum where female employees were present;

(iii) a separate allegation against complainant’s reporting manager (a female) that she checked complainant out and discussed her attire with male colleagues.

The Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) issued an adverse finding, recording that serious allegations were confirmed by multiple witnesses and that the petitioner was reluctant to accept his behaviour as unprofessional.
The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 18 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, before the Industrial Court, which was dismissed. Thereafter, an appeal was made before the High Court.

It was noted that even if three incidents recorded by the ICC were held to be proved, conduct attributed to Petitioner (particularly Incidents 1 and 2) could not be said to amount to ‘sexual harassment’ to the complainant, and the third incident did not pertain to the petitioner.

High Court Held

The High Court held that the ICC report was vague as it was drawn without discussing evidence on record, and most importantly, the ICC had not considered the issue of whether the allegations levelled against the petitioner in the first two incidents really constituted sexual harassment to the complainant. Therefore, the impugned judgment and order passed by the Industrial Court were indefensible and liable to be set aside.