Shared auto not ‘workplace’ under POSH Act: Bombay HC grants relief to SBI employee accused of sexual harassment

The Bombay High Court recently quashed an order passed by the internal committee (IC) of the State Bank of India (SBI), which had held a male employee guilty of sexual harassment over an incident that allegedly took place in a shared autorickshaw.

A Division Bench of Justices Suman Shyam and Firdosh Pooniwalla did not delve into whether the sexual harassment allegation was true, but based its ruling on the fact that the IC did not have the authority to decide on the matter.

The Court explained that the internal committee set up by an organisation to examine sexual harassment allegations against employees, can only entertain an aggrieved woman's complaint if the alleged sexual harassment took place at the “workplace" as defined under the POSH Act.

An autorickshaw taken by an employee to his office would not fall under the definition of a "workplace" when such transport has not been provided by the employer, the Court held.

In this case, although the SBI employee was going to his office by the autorickshaw, the transportation had not been provided by neither his employer or the complainant’s employer. 

Therefore, the Court found that the alleged incident in this case did not occur at a “workplace” under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act).

“In these circumstances, in our view, such transportation would not fall within the definition of a ‘workplace’. For the said reason, in our view, the alleged incident has not taken place at a ‘workplace’,” the Court said. 

As a result, the SBI's IC did not have the authority to pass a ruling in the matter, the Court concluded, while allowing a writ petition filed in the matter by Siddhesh Satpute, an SBI employee of 14 years.

“In our view, the order of August 29, 2023 is un-sustainable in law and hence, liable to be set aside,” the Court held in the June 16 ruling. 

The matter was tied to a complaint filed by a woman who claimed that Satpute (SBI employee) had touched her inappropriately while they were travelling together in a shared autorickshaw from Kurla station to Bandra Kurla Complex (BKC) on March 24, 2023.

Satpute denied the allegation, maintaining that at best, his hand may have brushed the woman's hand during the ride.

The SBI's IC, however, found him liable for sexual harassment in August that year. Satpute challenged this finding before the High Court, which has now set aside the IC's order on finding that it did not have jurisdiction to deal with the episode since it occurred outside the workplace.

The Court also underscored that an internal committee must first decide such jurisdictional questions before embarking on a full enquiry into sexual harassment allegations.

The Court, however, clarified that it has not examined the merits of the controversy or whether Satpute had sexually harassed the complainant in the shared autorickshaw or not.

"The said aspect of the matter is left open to be dealt with in accordance with law in an appropriate proceeding," the Court added.

Advocates Anand Pande and Shobit Shukla appeared for Satpute. 

Advocates Abhijit Joshi, Varsha Sawant, Varad Sirsikar and Sourav Somani appeared for the State Bank of India. 

[Read judgement]