Supreme Court: Improper handling of Sexual Harassment complaint violates Fundamental Right to Life and Dignity of Victim

The scheme of the 2013 Act, Vishaka Guidelines and Convention

on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women

(CEDAW) predicates that a nonhostile

working environment is the

basic limb of a dignified employment. The approach of law as regards

the cases of sexual harassment at workplace is not confined to cases

of actual commission of acts of harassment, but also covers

situations wherein the woman employee is subjected to prejudice,

hostility, discriminatory attitude and humiliation in day to day

functioning at the workplace. Taking any other view would defeat the

purpose of the law. A priori, when inaction or procrastination

(intentionally or otherwise) is meted out in response to the attempt of

setting the legal machinery in motion, what is put to peril is not just

the individual cries for the assistance of law but also the foundational

tenets of a society governed by the rule of law, thereby threatening the

larger public interests. The denial of timely inquiry and by a

competent forum, inevitably results in denial of justice and violation

of fundamental right. The factual matrix of the present case is replete

with lack of sensitivity on the part of Secretary (R) qua the complaint

of sexual harassment. To wit, time taken to process the stated

complaint and improper constitution of the first Complaints

Committee (intended or unintended) in violation of the Vishaka

Guidelines, constitute an appalling conglomeration of undignified

treatment and violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioner,

more particularly Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

104. In the present case, the petitioner had faced exceedingly

insensitive and undignified circumstances due to improper handling

of her complaint of sexual harassment. Regardless of the outcome of

the inquiry into the stated complaint, the fundamental rights of the

petitioner had been clearly impinged. Taking overall view of the

circumstances, we consider this to be a fit case to award

compensation to the petitioner for the stated violation of her right to

life and dignity, quantified at Rs.1,00,000/(

Rupees one lakh only).

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2365 OF 2020

Nisha Priya Bhatia  Vs  Union of India

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.

Dated:April 24, 2020.

Print Page

Procedure to be followed National commission for woman for determining whether vishaka guidelines are followed by organization in case of sexual harassment?

However, since this point of reference may assume significance in
many other cases and we are of the view that as far as the powers

and jurisdiction of the commission are concerned, it is well within the
power of the commission to inquire into and determine whether the
Vishaka guidelines were followed by an organization. Although in the
present case the 1st respondent need not look into this aspect in
other cases where the Visakha guidelines were not formed or offered
to be formed by the employers, the commission is empowered to
consider this issue. For that matter, the Commission may entertain
individual complaints to ascertain whether Vishaka guidelines were
followed. Needless to mention such enquiries may not be conducted
ex-parte, without notice to the organisation in question. The basic
rules of natural justice must be followed if the commission finds a
prima facie case. If the commission is inclined to reject the complaint
in limine notice to the organisation need not be issued.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.146 OF 2014
KPMG India Pvt. Ltd.

Vs.
National Commission for Women

CORAM : V. M. KANADE &
A. K. MENON, JJ.

PRONOUNCED ON : 11th August 2014.
Citation;2015(1)ALLMR726

JUDGMENT (PER A. K. MENON, J.)

Print Page

Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Bill, 2013 Passed by Parliament

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Bill, 2012 was passed by the Rajya Sabha on 26th February 2013. Lok Sabha has passed it in September 2012.

 

Sexual Harassment at workplace is a violation of women’s right to gender equality, life and liberty. It creates an insecure and hostile work environment, which discourages women’s participation in work, thereby adversely affecting their economic empowerment and the goal of inclusive growth. However, there is no domestic law to address this issue except a few provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Supreme Court Guidelines in the case of Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan. The increasing work participation rate of women has made it imperative that a comprehensive legislation focusing on prevention of sexual harassment as well as providing a redressal mechanism be enacted.

 

The salient features of the Act are as follows:

Print Page