KOHIMA, DECEMBER 12 (MExN): The Gauhati High Court, Kohima Bench, today dismissed a petition filed by Reny Wilfred, IAS, Joint Secretary, Finance Department, seeking to quash the entire criminal proceedings, including the Charge Sheet No. 6/2025, against him. The case, W.P. (Crl.)/10/2025, stemmed from a complaint lodged by the Nagaland State Commission for Women (NSCW) alleging sexual and mental harassment in the workplace, leading to the registration of a case under Sections 74, 75(2), and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
Justice Mitali Thakuria, after reviewing the records, the charge sheet, the prima facie report submitted by the Superintendent of Police (Crime), and the statements of ten victims recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., detailed the Court's findings. The Court confirmed that as per Section 5(1)(k) of the Nagaland Women Commission Act, 2006, the Commission is empowered to “receive complaints relating to the status, conditions and affairs of women from individuals and bodies, investigate them and report to the State Government.” It further noted that Section 6(1) of the same Act grants the Commission the “power of a Civil Court trying a suit” while performing its functions involving investigation and inquiry.
The Court observed that the Commission recorded the statements of the ten victim women under Sections 5 and 6 of the Act of 2006 after receiving a verbal complaint from the Chairman of IDAN. The judgment clarified that the criminal case “was not registered solely on the complaint of the NSCW, but after the preliminary inquiry report was submitted by the Superintendent of Police (Crime), wherein the concerned authority found strong prima facie materials against the accused petitioner.”
The preliminary inquiry report was found to be crucial, revealing that the accused petitioner “had made sexual advances, sexually coloured remarks, and unwelcome conduct, establishing a prima facie case for a cognizable offence of sexual harassment under Section 75 and 79 of the BNS, 2023.” The Court stated that the entire criminal proceeding cannot be quashed simply because the complaint was lodged by the NSCW Chairperson, as she “acted within the four corners of the Act of 2006,” having recorded the statement of ten victim women who are the subordinate staff of the petitioner.
Further, the judgment addressed the argument regarding the PoSH Act, 2013, holding that a criminal proceeding is “not barred, even if a case may be established under the PoSH Act, 2013, more particularly when the allegations of sexual harassment are brought by 10 women employees against the accused petitioner who is an IAS officer.” Concluding its observation, the Court found that “on the face of the complaint, the preliminary inquiry report, and the charge sheet, there is a strong prima facie case against the accused petitioner.” As a result, the Court determined it was “not a fit case for quashing the entire criminal proceeding,” and the Writ Petition (Criminal) was accordingly “dismissed.”
.jpg)
