Reprimanding an employee at the workplace over official duties does not amount to an offence under Section 504 IPC, the Supreme Court has said. The court observed that not questioning the employees’ work and performance, or addressing workplace misconduct would set a wrong example.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta made the observation in a 2022 criminal case against an officiating director of the National Institute of Mental Health who was accused of insulting an assistant professor.
In her filing, the professor alleged that the director reprimanded her in a loud voice after she complained against him to the higher authorities, further claiming that his actions caused her emotional distress and aggravated her medical condition post-COVID-19.
Stating that the allegations in the charge sheet were “purely conjectural” and failed to meet the legal threshold required to sustain the criminal charges, the bench also noted that workplace discipline and professional expectations were heightened during the pandemic and that the director’s action must be viewed in that context.
“It is a reasonable expectation on the part of a person who caters to the affairs at the helm that his juniors should attend to their professional duties with utmost sincerity and dedication,” the bench stated in the judgment delivered on February 10, as per a Hindustan Times report.
It highlighted that the complainant had several workplace indiscipline and negligence allegations pending against her. The director, as the head of the institution holds the authority to address disciplinary issues, the bench said, adding that the reprimand was a part of the “administrative function” and cannot be interpreted as an intentional insult to provoke her.
ALSO READ | Andhra Pradesh planning ‘Work From Home’ for women, says CM Naidu
It stressed that allowing such criminal cases to proceed would set a dangerous example and disrupt workplace discipline. If left unchecked, such behaviour will lead other employees to follow suit.
The case in question concerns an assistant professor at the National Institute for Empowerment of Persons with Intellectual Disabilities in Secunderabad, who claimed she was summoned by the director to his chamber on February 2, 2022. As per the charge sheet, the director addressed her in a “high-pitched voice,” questioning if she had considered conduct rules before submitting grievances against him to which the former protested.
Later, on February 5, an FIR was filed against the director, primarily alleging his failure to provide PPE kits during the pandemic and mental harassment. While the criminal proceedings against the director have been quashed by the apex court, other charges regarding the failure to provide PPE kits were not proven.
ALSO READ | Google ends diversity goals for workforce
(Edited by : Shoma Bhattacharjee)
