Karnataka HC Quashes Case Against 11 Bank Colleagues Over Employee’s Harassment Complaint, Citing 8-Month Delay And Later Caste Allegations

The second respondent, an employee of Standard Chartered Bank, alleged that her colleagues harassed and assaulted her in May and June 2018.

She complained to the police on 11 February 2019; a further complaint dated 8 July 2019, received on 18 July 2019, alleged caste-based discrimination and led to the invocation of offences under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(1)(w)(ii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The petitioners sought to quash both complaints and the FIR under Section 482 CrPC, arguing that the complaints were delayed, retaliatory and materially improved upon in the later complaint.

The State opposed quashing, submitting that the allegations required investigation.

The Court considered its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and miscarriage of justice, applying the principles in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal and other authorities cited by the petitioners concerning malicious or vexatious prosecution and the significance of unexplained delay and material improvements in a complaint.

It also considered the requirements of Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(1)(w)(ii) of the SC/ST Act, relying on authorities cited in the judgment concerning caste-related insult or intimidation and the requirement that the relevant conduct satisfy the statutory ingredients.

The judgment treated delay and surrounding circumstances as relevant to whether the prosecution was an abuse of process, while recognising the State’s submission that investigation ordinarily should not be curtailed at the threshold.

The Court found that the first complaint identified specific incidents but was filed more than eight months after the alleged events, and that the caste-discrimination allegations appeared only in the later complaint, filed about five months after the first.

It considered the complainant’s earlier approaches to other forums, the workplace disciplinary proceedings and her termination, and concluded that the timing and progression of the complaints supported the petitioners’ contention that the prosecution was retaliatory and that the SC/ST Act allegations were an afterthought.

On those circumstances, the Court held that allowing the prosecution to continue would amount to an abuse of process.

It quashed the complaints dated 11 February 2019 and 8 July 2019, received on 18 July 2019, and the FIR in Crime No. 44/2019 against the petitioners under Section 482 CrPC.