Skip to content
rawlaw unfiltered legal news
  • Home
  • News
  • Videos
  • Bookmarks
  • Profile
  • facebook.com
  • twitter.com
  • t.me
  • instagram.com
  • youtube.com

Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Against Joint Manager Alleging Workplace Harassment

Home » Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Against Joint Manager Alleging Workplace Harassment
Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Against Joint Manager Alleging Workplace Harassment, Holds General, Vague, and Retaliatory Allegations Insufficient to Constitute an Offence Under Sections 354-A and 354-D IPC
Posted inNews

Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Against Joint Manager Alleging Workplace Harassment, Holds General, Vague, and Retaliatory Allegations Insufficient to Constitute an Offence Under Sections 354-A and 354-D IPC

Court’s Decision The Bombay High Court quashed the First Information Report (FIR) registered under Sections 354-A (sexual harassment) and 354-D (stalking) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against the applicant.…
Posted by Rawlaw January 21, 2025

Recent News

  • Delhi High Court upholds revocation of letter of administration — “Obtained after 22 years by suppressing widow and daughter; probate court cannot reward concealment” while dismissing heirs’ appeal
  • Delhi High Court grants default bail in NDPS case — “Extension of investigation without producing accused is a gross illegality; right to statutory bail flows from Article 21” while setting aside trial court orders
  • Delhi High Court holds insurer liable for tractor–trolley death and recalculates compensation — “Trailer accident flows from insured tractor; welfare object of Motor Vehicles Act cannot be defeated by technicalities” while marginally enhancing award
  • Delhi High Court declines to quash reassessment at threshold — “Limitation under Section 149 post-Ashish Agarwal requires factual computation by Assessing Officer” while remanding matter
  • Delhi High Court upholds finding on genuineness of Will despite dismissal of probate — “Proof of execution can stand independent of probate relief; secondary evidence admissible on proof of loss” while rejecting son’s challenge
Copyright 2025 — Raw Law. All rights reserved.
Scroll to Top