Credibility of a witness

The Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 has given the internal committee the powers of a civil court judge. This means that the IC in itself is a quasi-judicial body who has the power to operate as a judicial body while giving recommendations to the employer. 

The prevention of sexual harassment inquiry proceedings seeks to take evidence into account only if there is any. But as these incidents generally tend to occur in isolation, evidence becomes difficult and hence witnesses are one of the major aspects in the inquiry process to determine the preponderance of probability of an event. 

For the IC to determine if a witness is credible or questionable, here are some things to look out for. 

A credible witness is ideally:

• One who helps in corroborating the story of either party
• They either have visually or in any other manner witnessed the incident cited in the complaint
• One who can corroborate the circumstances that lead up to the happening of the incident
• Someone who, through their statement, can help the committee reach a conclusion

A questionable witness is: 

• One who is not clear about the incident, or their own statements and constantly changes the same
• One who creates Irregularities or discrepancies in statements given
• One who is not able to provide any credible information with regards to the case and is just placed for questioning to defame either of the parties before the IC
• One who provides false evidence or lies in their statements is also not credible in the eyes of law and the IC being a quasi-judicial body means that the witness has lied before a body equivalent to a civil judge

IC recommendations for a questionable witness

In cases where a witness has either lied or provided false evidence, in criminal law in India and as well as the United States, the witness is impeached from the case. But since the proceedings of an IC are civil in nature, these are the recommendations that the IC can follow in a case of a dishonest witness. 

• The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 under Section 151, vests inherent powers on a civil judge for the purpose of meeting the obligations of justice. Since the IC is a quasi-judicial body having powers similar to a civil judge, we can apply the same here in the case of dismissing a witness. If the IC feels that a witness is dishonest in their statements or the evidence provided by the them is false, then they can dismiss the witness for the same. 
• The IC shall have the ultimate deciding power over the impeachment of a witness. If the IC in this case decides to dismiss a particular witness, they must provide valid reasons to justify the action. The dismissal can only be done if the IC feels that the obligations of justice cannot be met with the false evidence and statements provided by the questionable witness.  
• If the witness is impeached, report the same to the employer and the disciplinary committee for lying to the IC or providing false evidence to the case at hand. The IC can only remove the particular witness from the inquiry proceedings they were a part of but any disciplinary action can only be taken by the employer or the disciplinary committee of the company. 

In conclusion, the IC for conducting the inquiry process in a free and fair manner, and to meet the obligations of justice is empowered to dismiss a witness for giving false evidence or statements in the inquiry process before the IC.