Delhi Court Pulls Up Police For Probe Gaps, Orders Interrogation Of Hero Future Energies CEO In Sexual Harassment Case

New Delhi: A Delhi court has directed senior police supervision of the investigation into sexual harassment allegations against the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Hero Future Energies, identified as Srivatsan Iyer, after noting that the CEO had not been examined and had reportedly left the country. The order was issued on April 17 by Judicial Magistrate Neetika Kapoor at the Mahila Court in Saket, after the complainant stated before the court that the probe had stalled on key aspects.  

The case stems from an FIR registered under Sections 75, 78 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) against Iyer and a key managerial person of Hero Future Energies Pvt. Ltd., part of the Hero Motocorp Group. The complainant, a woman employee, has alleged sexual harassment at the workplace by a senior manager and subsequently by the CEO, along with criminal intimidation, allegedly to deter her from pursuing the matter.  

As per information, despite the FIR, the investigating officer (IO), Inspector Ajay Kumar, admitted before the court that no probe had been conducted so far in relation to Iyer. He also informed the court that co-accused Mayur Maheshwari had joined the investigation, but other witnesses named by the complainant were yet to be examined.  

Court Orders ACP Monitoring And Interrogation Of CEO 

Taking note of observations, the court said it was appropriate to direct the Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) concerned to monitor the investigation henceforth. “IO is directed to conduct an investigation and examine the witnesses as stated in the list provided by the applicant and interrogate accused Sri Vatsal (Srivatsan Iyer) and file a report by NDOH,” the order stated.  

During the hearing, Advocate Apoorva Pandey, who is the counsel for the complainant, submitted that no investigation had been carried out against the CEO and that he had left the country, a fact the IO confirmed. The court took serious note of the submission and specifically directed that Srivatsan Iyer be interrogated by the police, seeking compliance from the ACP.  

The complainant had approached the court alleging a lack of action from the investigating agency and filed an application seeking monitoring of the probe. The matter is now listed for further proceedings on June 11.  

Allegations Of Flawed Internal Inquiry

According to the complainant, she first approached the internal committee under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, but found the process biased and procedurally flawed. She alleged that the proceedings involved multiple committees and suppression of material documents.  

She claimed that although the inquiry held the accused guilty of misconduct amounting to sexual harassment, only trivial recommendations such as a warning and sensitisation, were made. The complainant further alleged that the CEO shielded the accused by refusing to accept his resignation and allowing him to continue in the organisation. She also stated that she was subjected to harassment by the CEO himself.  

Further, the employee separately challenged the outcome of the internal proceedings before the Industrial Tribunal at Rouse Avenue Courts in a case. On March 12, 2026, the Tribunal passed an interim order, directing, “During the pendency of this appeal or until further orders, no coercive or adverse action be taken against the appellant, which could prejudice her employment on account of or in connection with the present proceedings.”  

Though, despite the order, the complainant alleged that Hero Future Energies blocked her access to her official email account and told her not to attend the office. She contended that the company continues to victimise her and has not permitted her to enter the workplace or restore her email access.  

Advocate Apoorva Pandey, representing the complainant, informed the court that in the absence of effective internal redressal, the victim invoked remedies under the POSH Act. The matter has now been listed for further proceedings on June 11, when the court will review the progress of the investigation.