In workplaces across India, the implementation of the PoSH Act, 2013 (Prevention of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace) is not just about policies and posters — it’s about ensuring that survivors feel heard and that complaints are handled with fairness and thoroughness. A critical part of this process? Witnesses.
But not all witnesses are the same.
Let’s explore how different types of witnesses play a role in sexual harassment inquiries, using a real-world-inspired scenario — and the legal position when there are no witnesses except the victim.
🔍 The Scenario:
An employee, Rhea, files a complaint of sexual harassment against her manager, Karan, alleging that he made inappropriate comments and touched her without consent during an office party. She submits her complaint to the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC).
Here’s how various types of witnesses might come into play:
👁️🗨️ 1. Eyewitness
Who: A colleague who was present at the party and directly saw the inappropriate behavior.
Example: “I saw Karan put his arm around Rhea even though she looked visibly uncomfortable.”
Value: High — provides firsthand, direct evidence.
🗣️ 2. Hearsay Witness
Who: Someone who didn’t witness the incident but heard about it from others.
Example: “The next day, my teammate told me that Karan had misbehaved with Rhea.”
Value: Limited — often not admissible as primary evidence, but may be used to support patterns or provide leads.
💔 3. Victim Witness
Who: The complainant, Rhea herself.
Role: Shares her account, emotions, and the impact of the harassment.
Value: Central to the case — her testimony initiates the inquiry.
🎯 4. Expert Witness
Who: A psychologist or counselor, if Rhea sought therapy.
Example: “Rhea experienced emotional distress and anxiety post-incident.”
Value: Adds credibility to the psychological impact of the incident.
📸 5. Corroborative Witness
Who: A co-worker who didn’t see the act but noticed Rhea’s distress afterward.
Example: “She was crying in the restroom after the party.”
Value: Strengthens the narrative by supporting emotional or behavioral aftermath.
📜 6. Character Witness
Who: A person speaking about either party’s behavior patterns.
Example (for Rhea): “She’s always been professional and focused on work.”
Example (for Karan): “He has a history of crossing boundaries at office events.”
Value: Can establish credibility or pattern of conduct.
❓ 7. Hostile or Adverse Witness
Who: Someone initially cooperative but turns evasive or defensive.
Example: A friend of the accused who denies everything and shows aggression during questioning.
Value: Can still provide useful insights, especially if their behavior indicates bias or conflict of interest.
👀 8. Circumstantial Witness
Who: Someone who observed surrounding events or context.
Example: “Karan had been drinking heavily that night and followed Rhea around.”
Value: Offers indirect evidence that helps paint the full picture.
⚖️ What if there is no other witness? Is victim’s word enough?
Yes — the sole testimony of the victim can be enough under Indian law if it is trustworthy and consistent.
🧑⚖️ Relevant Case Law #1:
Vishaka & Others vs. State of Rajasthan (1997)
This landmark case led to the formation of the PoSH Act. The Supreme Court emphasized that a woman’s right to a safe workplace is fundamental, and that inquiries should not dismiss a complaint merely due to lack of witnesses.
🧑⚖️ Relevant Case Law #2:
Apparel Export Promotion Council vs. A.K. Chopra (1999)
The Supreme Court held that even attempts at physical advances without successful contact can constitute sexual harassment.
Importantly, it stated that “a victim’s testimony must be given due weight” and should not be disbelieved solely due to lack of corroboration.
“The absence of eyewitnesses is not a ground to disbelieve the victim.”
— Supreme Court of India
📚 Other Case Laws Involving Witness Testimonies in PoSH Cases
🧑⚖️ Case Law #3: Dr. Punita K. Sodhi vs. Union of India (2010)
This case emphasized the importance of following due process during PoSH inquiries, including giving both parties the chance to bring witnesses.
The court ruled that the credibility of witnesses, their consistency, and the manner in which statements are recorded — all affect the final outcome.
🧑⚖️ Case Law #4: D.V. Apparao vs. V. Krishna Kumari (Andhra HC, 2005)
In this case, co-worker testimonies played a key role. The court ruled in favor of the complainant after corroborative witnesses confirmed behavioral patterns of the accused and supported the victim’s emotional response.
✅ What Should ICCs Take Away from This?
- A victim’s word carries weight — especially when credible, consistent, and delivered with clarity.
- The absence of witnesses does not invalidate a complaint.
- All types of witnesses — even those who saw the emotional impact, not the act itself — can be useful.
- ICCs must assess witness statements objectively, and avoid biases.
- Courts give high regard to due process: let the inquiry be fair, timely, and documented.
💡 Final Thoughts
In cases of sexual harassment, witnesses can make or break a case. But even when there are no witnesses, the law supports survivors — provided the ICC investigates thoroughly and fairly.
Let’s work toward a culture where truth is respected, not just proven, and where workplaces are safe for every individual — seen or unseen.
Please reach out to us for any queries on Types of Witnesses in PoSH Inquiries.
For more blogs and articles, visit our official website. Contact us for workshops and queries related to POSH, EAP (Employee Assistance Program) , Diversity and Inclusion and Code Of Conduct.
