Suspicion, However Strong It May Be, Cannot Take The Place Of Proof: High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
Title: Mukesh Khampariya S/O V The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Ors.
Citation: Writ Petition No. 21852 of 2018
Decided on: 05th Of October, 2023
Coram: Justice Sujoy Paul
Introduction:
This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution assails the order dated 25.06.2018 and the enquiry report dated 25.07.2018 whereby the petitioner was held guilty for committing sexual harassment at the workplace.
Facts:
The petitioner was working as Station House Officer (SHO), in Police Station Gadarwara, District Narsinghpur between 27.08.2016 to 24.03.2017. During that period, respondent was posted in the said police station as Sub- Inspector.Respondent as an afterthought preferred a frivolous complaint dated 16.03.2017 alleging that petitioner committed sexual harassment in the workplace. Pursuant to the complaint dated 16.03.2017, an internal complaint committee was constituted as per the Sexual Harassment of Woman at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal), 2013.
The internal committee consisting of five members conducted the inquiry, recorded statement of witnesses and prepared the report on 26.05.2017 and opined that the allegations against the petitioner for committing sexual harassment in workplace are not established. The respondent preferred an application against the aforesaid report of internal complain committee dated 24.05.2017. On 25.12.2017 the departmental authority came to hold that allegation of sexual harassment could not be established against the petitioner.
learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to another report dated 25.07.2018 whereby another inquiry report was prepared wherein charges were found to be proved against the petitioner.
Court’s decision and analysis :
The complaint can be made in writing within a period of three months from the date of incident. In this case, it is clear that incident had taken place on 12/10/2016 and complaint was preferred on 16/03/2017. Thus, complaint itself was barred by time. Apart from that complaint was considered by a five members committee which came to hold in the report dated 26/05/2017 that allegation of sexual harassment in work place could not be established against the petitioner. Even in Departmental appeal the concern authority came to hold that for want of sufficient evidence, allegation of sexual harassment in workplace could not be established.
here is no material evidence available against the petitioner. Merely because the complainant preferred repeated complains, the petitioner was held to be guilty. Suspicion, however strong it may be, cannot take the place of proof [See: AIR 1964 SC 364 (Union of India v. H.C. Goel)] For this reason also, this enquiry report is liable to be set aside. Hence, impugned order of Police Headquarter dated 25/06/2018 and enquiry report dated 25/07/2018 are set aside.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Sushant Kumar Sharma