Sessions Court Grants Bail To POSH Member Facing Charges Over Victim Complaint In Nashik Case

In a significant judicial development, the Additional Sessions Judge-10 in Nashik, Amit Vinayak Kharkar, has granted bail to Ashwini Ashok Chainani, a member of the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) committee at Tata Consultancy Services. The court’s order comes after the formal filing of a charge-sheet in the ongoing legal proceedings initiated by the Mumbai Naka Police station.

Case Background

The legal dispute originated from an FIR registered against Chainani, alleging that she failed to act upon oral complaints made by a victim regarding sexual harassment by a colleague, Raza Memon. Chainani, who primarily operated from the Pune office, was accused of negligence in her capacity as a POSH committee member, which the prosecution argued emboldened the co-accused to continue his misconduct. The incident has been part of a series of complex legal battles involving multiple employees at the Nashik unit of the corporation.

Arguments Presented

During the bail hearing, counsel for the applicant argued that the allegations were inherently vague, noting a complete absence of specified dates or times regarding when the complaints were allegedly communicated. Furthermore, the defense emphasized that no formal written complaint or email was submitted to the applicant, which is a mandatory requirement under established reporting procedures. The defense also pointed to a "pick and choose" policy by the investigating authorities, noting that local team leaders, who were also informed of the misconduct, were not named as accused.

In opposition, the Assistant Public Prosecutor (APP) contended that the nature of the offence was severe and touched upon the modesty of a woman. The prosecution maintained that, even in the absence of written documents, the applicant was legally bound to take action on oral complaints, and her inaction constituted tacit support for the harassment.

Legal Analysis

The Court’s reasoning was anchored in the current evidentiary status of the case. By the time the bail was heard, the police had already filed a charge-sheet, thereby reducing the risk of evidence tampering. The Court recognized that the applicant’s role was limited to non-action on a complaint, and there was no evidence suggesting she posed a flight risk or would threaten witnesses. Judge Kharkar further observed that the prosecution failed to establish specific timelines, which weakened the prima facie case against the applicant.

Key Observations

The judgment provided vital insights into the limitations of the current charges:

• "The role attributed to the applicant is that she did not take cognizance of the oral complaint made by the victim."
• "Non performance of the duty resulted in the co-accused getting bolder and pursuing their harassment."
• "Considering the nature of offence and the role of the accused, she can be released on bail considering the fact that charge-sheet is filed."

Court's Decision

The Additional Sessions Judge-10 allowed the bail application, ordering Ashwini Ashok Chainani to be released upon executing a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one surety of the same amount. The bail is subject to standard conditions, including the requirement to submit a detailed current address and contact information, a prohibition against intimidating witnesses, and an explicit instruction not to commit similar offences. This decision highlights the legal necessity for clarity and specificity when levying charges against committee members tasked with upholding internal corporate regulations.