False Allegations Under POSH Act Dangerous, Will Compromise System: Justice N Kotiswar Singh
Supreme Court's Justice N Kotiswar Singh has highlighted the misuse of provisions of the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) Act and said that making false allegations under the law is equally dangerous.
Speaking at the launch of the Portal for Complaints of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace of the Delhi High Court, the Supreme Court judge reflected on allegations that the POSH Act may be misused.
'There is a possibility, and it has happened. Our past experience shows that when the Dowry Prohibition Act was introduced. In the 80s, when we were students, we heard every day in the newspapers, these bride-burning cases, which prompted the legislature to enact this Dowry Prohibition Act. We see false allegations being made. The same is with domestic violence also; this is something that we have to be careful…" he said.
Referring to the POSH Act itself, Justice Singh said that it is not a transactional Act but a multilayered one, and members of the internal complaints committees must genuinely believe in the efficacy of the system.
On the step taken by the Delhi High Court to launch the portal, Justice Singh said it is indeed a very important step for the pure purpose that it enhances confidentiality and confidence among people, apart from transparency.
'A workplace should be a place for opportunity and accomplishment and creativity. Not a place generating fear and anxiety. A workplace must provide for respect and dignity of individuals and equal opportunity for all. Any such act that negates a conducive atmosphere for work has to be forbidden… As far as women are concerned, there is nothing more grievous than sexual harassment. It demeans women, acts as a barrier to creativity, slows down their efficacy, causing immense mental and physical trauma, which is completely antithetical to the principles of equality, liberty and justice that form the core principles of our Constitution. Therefore, this menace has to be taken head-on…" he added.
Justice Singh said that sexual harassment is not an act perpetrated by one individual on another. In fact, he said, it is the result of misogynistic, patriarchal, feudalistic, and male chauvinistic ideals, which still prevail in the minds of many who consider the role of women to be confined only to the domestic sphere.
On the large number of women joining and becoming valuable partners of the national building exercise, contributing in all walks of life, Justice Singh referred to the judiciary and said, 'We see that now the number of lady recruits in the judiciary is more than men. The average perhaps ranges from 40 to 70%. In fact, we joke sometimes that the men's species is going to vanish from the Indian judiciary, at least as far as the district judiciary is concerned."
The event was also attended by Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, and Justice Prathiba M Singh, who is the Chairperson of the Internal Complaints Committee.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘Open defiance of courts': Lawyer who fought for a decade to get old vehicles banned on Delhi govt's U-turn
In 2014, Delhi-based lawyer Vardhaman Kaushik moved the National Green Tribunal (NGT) over the Capital's choking air pollution crisis. A decade and orders from the NGT and Supreme Court later, a no-fuel ban on end-of-life petrol and diesel vehicles has barely lasted three days. On Thursday, in a letter to the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) — the overarching statutory body for matters concerning air pollution — Delhi Environment Minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa had said that it would not be feasible to enforce the ban 'at this juncture', and 'immediate implementation… may be premature and potentially counter-productive'. The ban came into effect on July 1. The Delhi government's move has drawn sharp criticism from several quarters. According to Kaushik, the 'poor implementation' of the ban order is 'an open defiance of courts'. 'The (Supreme Court) judgment (on fuel ban) had come in long ago, in 2018… and it has not been executed,' Kaushik told The Indian Express. 'The fuel ban was only a way to implement the court's directions. The hue and cry over this now doesn't make sense.' 'This is not a new rule. These rules for end-of-life vehicles have been there for a long time. The judgment is not being taken seriously,' Kaushik said, adding that only a few vehicles have been impounded over the years. Kaushik dismissed the argument that the ban unfairly targets the middle class. 'People who can afford cars and sit in air-conditioned rooms are cribbing at not being able to sell their car at good rates… Their opinion should not matter,' he said. 'The larger population that cannot afford cars bears the brunt of air pollution.' He insisted that emissions, not the age of the vehicles, should be the focus. However, he underscored that age remains a legitimate proxy. 'Even if an age cap is put aside as suggested by the Environment Minister, the fact remains that a (Bharat Standard) BS III or a BS IV vehicle will always be far more polluting than a BS VI vehicle. The government needs to take a call at this juncture.' In April 2015, acting on Kaushik's plea, the NGT had laid the legal foundation for phasing out old vehicles from the Capital's roads. In 2018, the Supreme Court banned diesel vehicles older than 10 years and petrol vehicles older than 15 years in Delhi. The legal backing for the ban was reinforced by the 2018 SC order, which had upheld the NGT order. 'The Transport Departments of NCR will immediately announce that all diesel vehicles more than 10 years old and petrol vehicles more than 15 years old shall not ply in NCR in terms of the order of the National Green Tribunal…,' the order had said. It also mandated the impounding of violators and directed that lists of such vehicles be published on the websites of the Central Pollution Control Board and respective transport departments. Following the CAQM's April order on enforcing a fuel ban, a phased rollout was planned, first in Delhi from July 1, then expanded to the districts of Faridabad, Gurgaon, Ghaziabad, Gautam Buddha Nagar, and Sonipat in November. The plan was to expand the ban to the rest of the NCR from April 1, 2026.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Excise policy scam case: What's the fear in supplying list of ‘unrelied documents', Delhi HC asks CBI
'What is the fear' in providing the list of 'unrelied upon documents (URDs)', the Delhi High Court orally asked the CBI on Friday while hearing a petition filed by the central agency against a May 22 trial court order in connection with the excise policy scam case. The trial court had directed that summons to produce documents or summons to individuals must be included in the list of URDs. 'Unrelied' documents are collected by probe agencies at the time of investigation but not used as evidence by the prosecution. The CBI has challenged the May 22 Rouse Avenue special CBI court order, which had stated that the court will proceed with the arguments on charges 'once the relied-upon digital evidence copy and the list of URDs are supplied to the accused individuals'. The trial court had reasoned that 'as the CBI must provide copies of relied-upon digital data currently with CFSL (Central Forensic Science Laboratory), this court cannot yet hear arguments on charge, given that all relied-upon documents must be available to the accused before charges'. It had directed that 'all notices under Section 91/160 CrPC and written communications sent by CBI to others, including witnesses and accused, and all written communications/documents received by CBI concerning those notices/written communications, must be included in the list of URDs if CBI does not intend to rely on them in this trial'. Section 160 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) empowers police officers to summon individuals to assist in the probe. Directing that the list of URDs should be filed in court, and copies of the list must be supplied to all accused, the trial court had directed that the investigating officer (IO) 'shall file an affidavit confirming that no other such notice/communication/document is omitted from the relied-upon documents or the URD'. Opposing the direction to the IO, the CBI, while arguing before Justice Ravinder Dudeja, also opposed the direction that notices issued to and statements made by the accused under Section 160 of CrPC — before they were considered to be an accused in the case — be considered a part of URDs. The CBI's counsel told HC, 'We have already given whatever we are relying upon, the (special CBI) judge wants the entire data to be given… CrPC sections 91 and 160 are tools of investigation, how can it be given? It is not part of the evidence collected.' 'There cannot be a procedure in the Delhi excise case which is different from any other case… (IO of) CBI has to file an affidavit for (filing all unrelied communication/notices) everything? It is unheard of… Some people have intimate messages and videos, some have competitive information (as businesses are also accused in the case)… There are privacy concerns… Inter se, conflict of privacy in URDs should not stall the trial,' the counsel added. Further opposing the supply of CrPC Section 160 notices and statements of accused recorded prior to them being made accused, the CBI added, 'Once they have been made accused, that statement is not part of relied upon or unrelied upon documents, because those statements can also trample upon somebody's right to self-incrimination.' Justice Dudeja, however, asked the CBI's counsel, '…Point is, why should it not be given… Disclosure statements of accused persons are not made part of the record… Why did you record the statement of the accused at the first instance if you were not going to rely, or not rely on such statements? You can provide the list (of URDs).' While CBI contended that if included in the list of URDs, 'it will then be seen by everybody else', Justice Dudeja orally responded, 'Show then… what is the fear… What is the prejudice being caused to you in case you hand over the copies of the notices under CrPC Section 160? Why do you not want to share these notices?' The CBI contended, 'It is not about fear, it's about what is relevant and not… (If the trial court's directions are upheld) what will happen is, it will become a practice (of including CrPC Section 160 notices) which does not exist at all… It is a roving inquiry.' A defence advocate for the accused, Rajat Bharadwaj, contended before the court, 'The fear is the entire frivolous investigation they have done will come all out in the open. Since past six months, they are not supplying us these documents… thereby these directions have been passed by the trial court.' Another defence advocate, Adit Pujari, added, 'This is a bogey being played (by CBI)… that supply of the list is going to delay arguments on charge…' While an order is awaited, Justice Dudeja indicated that the court is not inclined to stay the order till a status report is filed, all accused are served and their responses to the CBI's petition come on record. The court also indicated that it is agreeable only to the aspect of staying the direction that requires the IO to file an affidavit before the trial court.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
‘DU will not encourage anything that glorifies Pakistan': V-C amid syllabus revisions
Amid the ongoing debate over curriculum changes in several departments, Delhi University Vice-Chancellor Yogesh Singh Thursday told The Indian Express that the varsity will not 'encourage anything that glorifies Pakistan'. Singh's remarks follow internal deliberations over the likely removal of these postgraduate courses in Political Science: Pakistan and the World, China's Role in the Contemporary World, Islam and International Relations, Pakistan: State and Society, and Religious Nationalism and Political Violence. The V-C clarified that while departments are free to propose Pakistani thinkers 'who are not anti-national,' final decisions on academic content rest with the university's elected Academic Council (AC), not the administration. 'Syllabus and academic matters are passed by the AC, which is a democratic house in a democratic manner,' Singh said. Discussions around syllabi revision have taken on political and ideological overtones at the varsity, with several faculty members raising concerns about the narrowing of academic space. Following the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir, heads of departments were reportedly instructed to review academic material and remove any unnecessary 'glorification' of Pakistan. In June, The Indian Express reported that the Department of Philosophy had been directed to exclude references to Pakistan, poet-philosopher Muhammad Iqbal, as well as the Manusmriti from its syllabi following an email directive from Dean of Academics. Speaking to The Indian Express, Professor Sanjeev Kumar H M, a faculty member of the Department of Political Science with a specialisation in Islamic Thought and International Relations, among others, defended the revision process. 'There is a process in which the Department Council proposes changes, and it then goes to the Committee of Courses. That committee makes suggestions, and the syllabus then goes to the Board of Studies. From there, it moves to the Standing Committee, where elected members and experts comment and make recommendations. It is then sent back to the department. This entire process is mediated by the Head. There is a democratic process involved in this — it is a matter between the faculty and the Standing Committee,' he said. He added that some readings from 10–15 years ago may now appear decontextualised, given changing global dynamics. 'Our goal is to give the right image. How we portray Pakistan needs some kind of streamlining. It is not about administrative interference,' Kumar said. 'Debating Article 370, for instance, becomes decontextualised without background.' Harendranath Tiwari, member of the Standing Committee, argued that the ideological bent of some proposed papers was a concern. 'The Arts have always been dominated by Left ideologies. Certain papers presented in the Standing Committee were agenda-driven. It is not like Pakistan is not being taught — it is taught in various courses. But the perspective matters. Courses with an 'India-centric' approach have been passed. The problem lies with the 'Pakistan-centric' way of drafting,' he said. However, a professor from the History department, speaking on condition of anonymity, said: 'How do we teach Partition without mentioning or talking about Pakistan?' The professor added that efforts to erase or avoid discussion of sensitive subjects 'risk diluting both historical accuracy and academic honesty'. Professor Rekha Saxena, Head, Department of Political Science, declined to comment when contacted by The Indian Express. Other departments have also seen cuts in their syllabi. During a meeting of the Standing Committee on Academic Matters last month, several key topics — including the Israel-Palestine conflict, the Kashmir issue — were allegedly removed from a proposed syllabus revision by the Department of Psychology.
