A court in Nashik has refused bail to Tata Consultancy Services executive Ashwini Chainani, observing that her conduct as a member of the company’s Internal Complaints Committee reflected “silence and insensitivity” toward alleged workplace harassment.
Additional Sessions Judge VV Kathare said Chainani, despite serving on the committee formed under the POSH Act, failed to support the complainant or act against the accused employees when allegations first surfaced.
The court remarked that her inaction effectively enabled the alleged misconduct.
According to the order, Chainani neither intervened nor initiated corrective steps even as the situation escalated inside the workplace. The judge noted that her behaviour suggested she ignored what was happening around her instead of exercising the responsibility attached to her role on the committee.
Investigators have accused multiple TCS employees of sexually harassing women staff members and attempting religious conversion. The case has led to several FIRs at Deolali and Mumbai Naka police stations. Eight individuals, including senior team officials and two women employees, have been named.
The complaints describe a workplace marked by alleged intimidation, sexually loaded remarks, humiliation, threats and negative professional assessments. One complainant alleged repeated harassment by team leaders Raza Memon and Shahrukh, claiming they made intrusive comments about her personal and marital life while engaging in inappropriate conduct at work.
The court noted that the office environment had allegedly deteriorated to such an extent that the complainant resigned in March 2026, shortly before the criminal complaint was lodged.
Judge Kathare stressed that members of Internal Committees under the POSH framework carry a statutory obligation to assist women employees who come forward with harassment complaints. Instead of helping the complainant, the court observed, Chainani allegedly advised her to ignore the issue and move on.
The defence argued that arrest procedures were not properly followed and claimed Chainani was given inadequate notice before being detained.
However, the prosecution maintained that she had failed to cooperate with investigators and could potentially influence witnesses or interfere with evidence if released.
Accepting those concerns, the court rejected the bail application.
