According to the FIR filed in Pune, the alleged offences occurred between May 2024 and April 8, 2026. | Photo Credit: coehm

A 33-year-old woman employee of Anand Rathi Wealth has alleged sexual harassment and intimidation by five senior officials, even as the firm has dismissed her complaint as “frivolous.”

The FIR registered by the complainant at the Shivajinagar Police Station on April 10, names Swapan Chakraborty  (Executive Director), Rakesh Rawal (Chief Executive Officer), Feroze Azeez (Joint Chief Executive Officer), Tejal Shah (Head – Human Resources), and Sonali Rawal (Executive Director).

Alleged offences

According to the FIR filed in Pune, the alleged offences occurred between May 2024 and April 8, 2026. The complainant has alleged that Swapan Chakraborty  attempted to make physical advances towards her and, on multiple occasions, used force amounting to outraging her modesty. She further alleged that he persistently followed her and issued threats that her career would be jeopardised if she pursued a complaint

“This is a frivolous matter against the senior executives (CEO, Joint CEO and the other two women employees mentioned in the FIR) of the company and all necessary legal steps are being taken,” the company reiterated a statement made earlier. It declined further comment on the matter as it was sub-judice, but was co-operating with the authorities and submitting the required documents.

The FIR states that despite lodging an internal complaint regarding sexual harassment, no action was taken by the organisation. Instead, the complainant has alleged that Swapan Chakraborty   was supported, while she faced hostility at the workplace and was subsequently transferred to Dubai in a purported act of victimisation.

The case is currently under investigation by Sub-Inspector Jadhav of Shivajinagar Police Station.

Company insiders said that initially the complainant had approached the NM Joshi Marg police station in Mumbai last year to file a complaint but then did not appear when she was called to record her statement, following which the case was closed.

The company’s stand is that while the complainant was repeatedly called to the police station for inquiry and register a formal case, she avoided registering the offence.

Published on April 14, 2026