The article examines evolving POSH compliance in India, highlighting a shift from procedural compliance to strict governance accountability. Using the TCS Nashik incident as a case study, it underscores how failure to act on complaints can lead to criminal liability, with inaction being treated as abetment. The case also reflects complex issues like intersectional harassment and systemic gaps in Internal Committee (IC) functioning. Judicial developments, including the “impact over intent” standard and expanded jurisdiction, reinforce employee-centric protection, while regulatory changes mandate detailed POSH disclosures in Board reports. The article stresses strengthening ICs as independent, quasi-judicial bodies with proper training, digital tracking, and external oversight. It concludes that workplace safety is now a core ESG governance metric, requiring organizations to move beyond symbolic compliance toward demonstrable accountability, transparency, and proactive redressal mechanisms.
I. The Regulatory Shift: From “Good-to-Have” to Mandatory Governance
In the current corporate landscape, “True compliance is not just celebrated—it is strengthened through accountability.” For Governance Professionals (CS/CA/Legal Counsel), workplace safety is no longer a peripheral HR matter; it is a core component of the Governance (G) in ESG.
The recent developments at the TCS Nashik unit (April 2026)—involving nine FIRs and the arrest of senior officials—serve as a critical case study. It highlights that even robust corporate giants are vulnerable if their internal redressal mechanisms fail to translate “policy” into “procedural action.”
II. Case Analysis: The TCS Nashik Breakdown (2022–2026)
The TCS situation provides a diagnostic view of systemic failure in POSH implementation:
- The Inaction Liability: Reports suggest that repeated complaints were made as early as 2022. The subsequent arrest of an HR Manager and an Operations Manager in 2026 confirms a major judicial shift: Procedural inaction is now viewed as abetment.
- Intersectional Harassment: The case involved not only sexual harassment (Section 75 BNS) but also religious coercion (Section 299 BNS) and criminal intimidation.
- The Lesson: An Internal Committee (IC) that fails to take cognisance of a complaint effectively abets the misconduct, exposing the organization to criminal rather than just civil liability.
III. Landmark Judicial Precedents & Regulatory Updates
To justify a move toward stricter action, Professionals must incorporate these recent judicial and statutory developments:
1. The “Impact Over Intent” Rule (HCL Technologies v. N. Parsarathy)
The Madras High Court reinforced the “Reasonable Woman Standard.” The court ruled that the perpetrator’s “friendly intent” is irrelevant if the impact on the victim is unwelcome.
Strategic Action: Internal Committees must be trained to assess the objective impact on the workplace environment rather than accepting the “harmless flirtation” defense.
2. Universal Jurisdiction (Dr. Sohail Malik v. Union of India, 2025)
The Supreme Court expanded the interpretative scope of the Act, ruling that a woman can approach her own IC even if the respondent works for a different organization or branch.
Strategic Action: Organizations must update their POSH manuals to include “Cross-Organizational Redressal” protocols.
3. MCA’s Mandate: Companies (Accounts) Second Amendment Rules, 2025
Effective July 14, 2025, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) has turned POSH into a measurable metric. The Board’s Report must now include:
1. Number of sexual harassment complaints received.
2. Number of cases disposed of.
3. Critical: Number of cases pending for more than 90 days.
IV. Strengthening the Internal Committee (IC) as a Quasi-Judicial Body
The IC is the backbone of POSH. To avoid the “Response Gap” seen in recent corporate crises, Professionals should advocate for:
| Pillar | Governance Strategy |
| Functional Autonomy | The IC must operate independently of HR and Operations to prevent “complaint suppression.” |
| External Member Engagement | The External Member must be a functional auditor, not just a name on a letterhead. |
| BNS Awareness | Training IC members on the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) to recognize when a POSH complaint overlaps with criminal offenses. |
| Digital Audit Trails | Utilizing encrypted portals (like a corporate SHe-Box) to track the 90-day statutory timeline. |
Export to Sheets
V. Conclusion: Moving from Compliance to Commitment
The lessons emerging from cases like TCS are constructive, not just cautionary. The framework already exists; the law is clear. What remains is the transition from “appearing compliant” to “being accountable.”
As Governance Professionals, our task is to ensure that the question “Safety… where are you?” is replaced by a verified Board statement: “Safety… we built it here.”
******
The author is a Fellow Member of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India (ICSI) and a specialist in Corporate Governance and POSH compliance.
Author Bio
