How to Handle PoSH Complaints Involving Accused from Different Organizations Post Supreme Court's Jurisdiction Clarification?

On December 10, 2025, the Supreme Court resolved a jurisdictional issue that had been causing confusion for many survivors and HR teams under the PoSH Act. The case involved an IAS officer in the Department of Food and Public Distribution in New Delhi who alleged sexual harassment by an IRS officer posted in a different department. The accused officer challenged the jurisdiction of the committee in her department, arguing that only the committee in his department could legally inquire into the case. After going through the Central Administrative Tribunal and the Delhi High Court, the case reached the Supreme Court. The court examined the structure of Sections 2 and 11 of the PoSH Act and held that the Internal Committee at the aggrieved woman's workplace has the jurisdiction to conduct the inquiry, even if the respondent is employed in another organization or department.

This ruling has significant implications for HR departments, especially those dealing with complaints involving vendors, consultants, visiting leaders, and cross-functional project teams. It also brings relief to survivors who previously had to approach an unfamiliar or hostile workplace to be heard. However, it also presents challenges for compliance officers who now have to manage the complexity of fact-finding when witnesses and documents are in different organizations.

From a governance perspective, this judgment requires every employer to reconsider how its PoSH policy handles third-party and inter-organizational cases. The Supreme Court has confirmed that the Internal Committee at the survivor's workplace leads the fact-finding, while the respondent's employer is expected to fully cooperate and then decide on disciplinary action under its own service rules, guided by that report.

Given this, how would your organization handle a PoSH complaint if the accused worked for a client, vendor, or group company rather than on your own payroll? Do your current policies and contracts with third parties clearly explain who investigates, who decides punishment, and how information will be shared in such cases?

The recent Supreme Court ruling has indeed brought clarity to the jurisdictional issue under the PoSH Act. Here's a step-by-step action plan on how your organization can handle PoSH complaints involving accused from different organizations:

1. Review your PoSH Policy: First, review your existing PoSH policy. Ensure that it clearly outlines the process for handling complaints involving third parties. It should clearly specify who investigates, who decides the punishment, and how information will be shared in such cases.

2. Update Contracts with Third Parties: Update your contracts with third parties like vendors, clients, or group companies. Include clauses that mandate cooperation in investigations and disciplinary proceedings related to PoSH complaints.

3. Establish Clear Communication Channels: Establish clear communication channels with other organizations. This is crucial to ensure that neither side feels ambushed or denied a fair hearing.

4. Training: Train your HR team and Internal Committee on the new jurisdiction rules. Run scenario drills where the complainant and respondent are in different companies or group entities. This will help them understand what to do when a cross-workplace complaint lands.

5. Maintain Confidentiality: Lastly, ensure that confidentiality is maintained throughout the process. This is crucial to protect the rights of both the complainant and the respondent.

Remember, the key is to ensure a fair and unbiased investigation, irrespective of where the accused is employed. This ruling is a significant step towards ensuring justice for survivors of sexual harassment at the workplace.