Ch. V · §14

Chapter V

Inquiry & Relief

Section

Chapter V · Inquiry & Relief

Section 14

Punishment for false or malicious complaint and false evidence

Section OverviewPending legal verification

Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at a conclusion that the allegation against the respondent is malicious or the aggrieved woman or any other person making the complaint has made the complaint knowing it to be false or has produced any forged or misleading document, it may recommend to the employer or the District Officer, as the case may be, to take action against the woman or the person who has made the complaint under the service rules applicable to her or him or where no such service rules exist, in such manner as may be prescribed.

Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at a conclusion that during the inquiry any witness has given false evidence or produced forged or misleading documents, it may recommend to the employer of the witness or the District Officer, as the case may be, to take action against the witness in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to the said witness or where no such service rules exist, in such manner as may be prescribed.

a mere inability to substantiate a complaint or to provide adequate proof need not attract action against the complainant or the witnesses under this section.

For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that the malicious intent on part of the complainant shall be established after an inquiry in accordance with the procedure established, before any action is recommended under this section.

Temporary structural and explanatory content only; it is not a verbatim reproduction. Complete statutory text and legal commentary will be integrated after separate legal verification.

Source: Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of IndiaRetrieved: 2024-01-15

Plain Language

If the committee finds that the complaint was made maliciously, knowing it was false, or with forged documents, it may recommend action against the complainant.

If a witness gave false evidence or produced forged documents, the committee may recommend action against that witness.

Critically, the inability to prove a complaint is NOT the same as a malicious complaint — the proviso expressly protects complainants and witnesses who simply could not substantiate their case.

Malicious intent must be established through a separate inquiry process before any action can be recommended against the complainant.

Why It Matters

This section is intentionally narrow. It exists to deter deliberate abuse of the complaint mechanism, not to punish women who cannot prove their case.

The proviso is a critical safeguard: a complaint that fails on merits is not automatically a false complaint.

Misusing Section 14 to silence or deter legitimate complaints is itself a compliance failure.

The requirement of a separate inquiry into malicious intent adds a procedural safeguard against arbitrary invocation.

Practical Example

Insufficient evidence is not malice

Scenario: A complainant files a complaint but is unable to provide sufficient evidence. The IC finds the allegation not proved.

Outcome: The IC cannot recommend action under Section 14. Inability to substantiate a complaint does not make it malicious. The proviso expressly protects this situation.

Forged evidence

Scenario: During the inquiry, the IC discovers that the complainant fabricated chat messages and submitted forged screenshots.

Outcome: After a separate inquiry into malicious intent, the IC may recommend action under Section 14 for producing forged or misleading documents.

Misuse of Section 14

Scenario: An HR manager pressures the IC to invoke Section 14 because the complainant could not prove her case.

Outcome: The IC must refuse. The proviso is clear: inability to substantiate is not grounds for action under this section. Pressuring the IC in this manner is a compliance failure.

Who Must Act

ic member

Never invoke Section 14 just because evidence was insufficient.
Conduct a separate inquiry into malicious intent before recommending action against a complainant.
Record the basis for concluding malicious intent clearly and with specificity.

employer

Do not pressure the committee to invoke Section 14 as a deterrent or retaliation.
Understand that a complaint that cannot be proved is not automatically a false complaint.

employee

A complaint that cannot be proved is not automatically a bad-faith complaint — you are protected by the proviso.
Do not produce forged or misleading documents — this can attract action under Section 14.

Compliance

✓

Establish malicious intent through a separate inquiry before recommending action against a complainant

Actor: Internal Committee / Local Committee · Rule: Section 14, Explanation

✓

Do not treat inability to substantiate a complaint as grounds for action under this section

Actor: Internal Committee / Local Committee · Rule: Section 14, Proviso

Common Mistakes

✗

Treating a complaint that could not be proved as a 'false complaint' — the proviso expressly protects this situation.

✗

Invoking Section 14 without conducting a separate inquiry into malicious intent.

✗

Using Section 14 as a deterrent to discourage complaints — this defeats the protective purpose of the Act.

✗

Conflating 'not proved' with 'malicious' — these are legally distinct concepts.

Source & Status

This page contains temporary structural and explanatory content, not a verbatim reproduction of the Act.

Source: Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India

Publication status: Temporary content pending separate legal verification