The Supreme Court in the Dr Sohail Malik vs Union Of India (2025) case ruled that the Internal Committee (ICC) at the aggrieved woman's workplace has the jurisdiction to conduct the initial fact-finding inquiry in inter-departmental POSH cases, rejecting the argument that only the respondent's ICC has authority. This critical decision simplifies the process for all employees and companies under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013 (POSH Act).

Many companies unwittingly expose themselves to defamation suits by reporting a former employee as "guilty" of sexual harassment in a Background Verification (BGV) check when the inquiry is either pending, inconclusive, or the person was merely an "accused" (Respondent) without a final verdict. Confidentiality is a critical aspect for an effective inquiry and redressal mechanism under the PoSH Act. The primary legal framework governing non-disclosure is Section 16 of the Act.

One of the most common questions organisations face when setting up their Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) framework is regarding role duality: Can the POSH Nodal Officer also serve as a member of the Internal Committee (IC)? The short answer: No. While the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 does not explicitly prohibit this, both the SHe-Box portal’s operational design and the principles of natural justice make suc