POSH Law: No Double Jeopardy in POSH Inquiries: The Myth of the "Second Departmental Trial.

For years, a standard tactical maneuver deployed by respondents contesting major penalties such as termination or compulsory retirement has been to demand a completely fresh, de novo departmental inquiry under standard service or establishment rules. The core of this argument rested on the premise that an Internal Committee (IC) report is merely a preliminary fact-finding document, and that executing a life-altering career penalty without a secondary, traditional departmental trial violates basic service jurisprudence. The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Arun A. Iyer v. IIT Bombay has decisively dismantled this defense, establishing that forcing a second inquiry amounts to an impermissible duplication of proceedings that flies in the face of legislative intent.

The Court’s reasoning cuts straight through procedural redundancy. It clarifies that under Section 11 of the POSH Act, 2013, read alongside standard central or institutional rules, the IC is vested with the powers of a civil court and functions as a full-fledged, specialized inquiring authority. When an employer initiates an inquiry through a legally constituted IC, and that committee conducts an exhaustive investigation adhering to due process, that exercise satisfies the legal requirement of a full disciplinary inquiry. Subjecting a complainant to testify a second time before a general disciplinary panel is not only a redundant administrative exercise but an active form of systemic re-traumatization that the law explicitly seeks to prevent.

For corporate boards, HR leaders, and legal counsels, this ruling solidifies a critical operational reality: there is no "second bite at the apple" for a respondent who has participated in a comprehensive IC process. The myth of the mandatory second departmental trial is officially busted. The focus must now entirely shift away from post-facto procedural maneuvering and toward ensuring that the single, original IC pathway is so fundamentally sound, neutral, and thorough that it stands alone as the definitive legal bedrock for any subsequent disciplinary action.