Authored By: Amrita kumari
Jharkhand Rai University
Case Name: Vishaka and Others v. State of Rajasthan and Others AIR 1997 SC 3011; (1997) 6 SCC 241
Name of the Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench Composition: Chief Justice J. S. Verma (Presiding Judge), Justice Sujata V. Manohar, Justice B. N. Kirpal
Bench Type: Three-Judge Bench
Date of Judgment– 13 August 1997
Parties Involved
Petitioners: Vishaka and others were a group of social activists, NGOs, and women’s rights advocates who came together to fight for justice. They went to the Supreme Court after a government worker named Bhanwari Devi was brutally gang-raped in Rajasthan. They argued that there were no proper laws to protect women from sexual harassment or assault while doing their jobs.
Respondents: The case was against the State of Rajasthan and the Government of India. The government was included in the case because it failed to keep women safe at work and didn’t have proper laws to protect them.
Facts of the Case
Background:
The Vishaka case began after a tragic incident involving Bhanwari Devi, a social worker who worked in Rajasthan’s Women’s Development Programme. As part of her job, Bhanwari Devi tried to stop the child marriage of a one-year-old girl in her village. Her brave action made some upper-caste men in the village angry, and in 1992, they took revenge by gang-raping her.
When Bhanwari Devi tried to get justice, she was treated badly and humiliated by the police and doctors. The police took a long time to file her report, and the doctors didn’t do the medical check properly. The court let all the men go free, which made people all over the country angry and raised voices for justice. It also showed that there were no clear laws to protect women from harassment at their workplaces.
At that time, there were some laws in the Indian Penal Code – like Sections 354 and 509 – that punished those who insulted or disrespected women, but they weren’t enough to deal with sexual harassment at work, But there was no specific law to protect women from sexual harassment at work.
Chronological Summary:
1992: Bhanwari Devi was assaulted while performing her duties.
Between 1993 and 1996, many NGOs and women’s groups went to the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution. They filed a petition asking the Court to protect the basic rights of working women.
In 1997, the Supreme Court gave a historic judgment in the Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan case. It set clear rules to stop sexual harassment at workplaces – these became known as the Vishaka Guidelines.
Issues Raised
- The main question was whether sexual harassment at work breaks the basic rights of women guaranteed by the Constitution – like the right to equality, freedom, and a safe life with dignity (Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21).?
- The second question was whether the Supreme Court had the power to create its own rules to stop sexual harassment at work, since there was no proper law for it at that time.?
- The third question was whether international agreements like CEDAW – which protect women’s rights – could be used in India’s own laws to help safeguard women.?
Arguments of the Parties
Petitioners’ Arguments: The petitioners said that not having a law to protect women from sexual harassment was a clear violation of their basic rights – like equality, freedom, and living with dignity – guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution. They said that sexual harassment made women feel scared and ashamed, stopping them from working freely and safely.
They also said that since India agreed to CEDAW in 1993, the government had a duty to protect women from violence and discrimination based on gender. So, the Supreme Court had the right under Article 32 to make rules to protect women’s basic rights, since there was no proper law for it.
Respondents’ Arguments: The State of Rajasthan and the Indian government said that only Parliament has the power to make laws, not the Supreme Court. They said the Court shouldn’t act like the law-making body by creating its own rules and guidelines.
They also said that the existing laws, like Sections 354 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code, were already enough to deal with such cases. They argued that these laws already protected women from assault or insult, and that the government was taking steps to support women’s welfare.
But the government couldn’t show any proper policy or system that directly dealt with sexual harassment at work.
Judgment
The Supreme Court gave a unanimous decision in favour of the petitioners. The Court said that sexual harassment at work breaks women’s basic rights – the right to equality, to be treated fairly, to work freely, and to live with dignity.
The Court said that since there was no specific law, it needed to create clear rules to make sure women were treated equally and protected from sexual harassment at work all over India. These rules would stay in place until Parliament made a proper law for it.
These rules, known as the Vishaka Guidelines, put responsibility on employers and organizations to stop sexual harassment and take action if it happens. The Court ordered that every workplace, whether government or private, must have a system to handle complaints, investigations, and actions against sexual harassment.
So, the Court accepted the petition, and the Vishaka Guidelines became the law of the land.
Legal Reasoning
The Court’s reasoning was deeply rooted in constitutional interpretation and international human rights law.
- Constitutional Foundation:
The Court relied heavily on the fundamental rights guaranteed under:
Article 14 — Equality before the law and equal protection of laws.
Article 15 — Prohibition of discrimination on the ground of sex.
Article 19(1)(g) — Freedom to practice any profession or occupation.
Article 21 — Right to life and personal liberty, which includes the right to live with dignity.
The Court said that sexually harassing a woman hurts her dignity and directly breaks her constitutional rights.
- International Obligations:
Referring to Articles 51 and 253 of the Constitution, the Court said that India has international duties under CEDAW to end discrimination against women. Since India had agreed to CEDAW, the Court said its rules could be used to understand and protect women’s rights in India’s own laws, as long as they didn’t clash with any existing laws.
The Court referred to CEDAW and its guidelines to stress that the government must take action to stop sexual harassment and discrimination against women.
- Judicial Innovation:
The Court admitted that there was no proper law for this issue but said it had the right under Article 32 to step in and take action. It said that the Supreme Court has a duty to protect people’s basic rights and can make rules or give directions until the government makes a proper law.
- Precedents Cited:
The Court referred to several earlier judgments to support its decision.
C.E.S.C. Ltd. V. Subhash Chandra Bose (1992) 1 SCC 441 — Expanded the scope of Article 21 to include the right to a dignified life.
People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India (1982) – The Court said that the government has a duty to protect the basic rights of weak and vulnerable groups, even when no specific law exists for it.
Conclusion
The Vishaka judgment was a turning point in Indian law. It was the first time the Supreme Court treated sexual harassment at work as a violation of women’s constitutional and human rights, not just a personal or moral problem.
The judgment achieved several milestones:
- It established that sexual harassment is a violation of fundamental rights.
- It introduced the Vishaka Guidelines, which were legally binding and stayed in force for more than ten years.
- It confirmed that the judiciary can step in when there’s no law and take action to protect women’s dignity.
- It brought international agreements like CEDAW into the way India interprets and protects constitutional rights.
After the Vishaka judgment, the Indian government passed the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, also known as the POSH Act. This law put the Vishaka Guidelines into official legal form and made it mandatory for every employer to prevent and handle cases of sexual harassment at work.
However, how well these rules work mostly depends on how properly they are followed and enforced. Studies and reports show that many workplaces, especially in the unorganised sector, still don’t follow these rules properly.
Intern’s Critical Reflection:
From an academic and legal internship point of view, Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan is a powerful example of how the judiciary can actively use the Constitution to bring justice and protect rights. It shows that the courts can step in to protect vulnerable groups when the government fails to make or enforce proper laws.
The case connects constitutional law, gender justice, and international human rights, showing how they work together to protect women. It shows how courts can interpret fundamental rights in a flexible way to deal with changing social issues and realities.
Still, it’s important to understand that court-made rules alone can’t change the mind-set or culture of workplaces. The 2013 law was a big step, but many problems still remain – people don’t know their rights, justice is hard to get, and old patriarchal mind-sets still stand in the way of what the Vishaka judgment wanted to achieve.
Intern’s Critical Reflection:
From a student or legal intern’s view, Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan is a great example of how the court used the Constitution to take action and bring justice. It shows that the courts can protect weak or vulnerable groups when the government fails to make or update laws.
The case connects constitutional law, women’s rights, and international human rights all together. It shows how courts can understand and apply fundamental rights in new ways to deal with changing social problems.
Still, we have to accept that court rules alone can’t change how people think or behave at work. The 2013 law was needed, but many people still don’t know their rights, justice is hard to get, and old patriarchal mind-sets continue to go against what the Vishaka judgment stood for.
In Summary:
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) is a landmark case that declared sexual harassment a violation of women’s basic rights and set clear rules to prevent it at workplaces. It’s still a key milestone for gender justice in India, inspiring new laws and spreading awareness about women’s rights.
Reference(S):
1.Indian Kanoon, Vishaka & Ors. v State of Rajasthan & Ors. (AIR 1997 SC 3011; (1997) 6 SCC 241) https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1031794
2.Lawctopus, ‘Case Comment – Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.’ (Academike) https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/case-comment-vishaka-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors/
3.iPleaders, ‘Case Analysis – Vishaka & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (1997)’ (iPleaders Blog) https://blog.ipleaders.in/vishaka-ors-vs-state-of-rajasthan-ors-1997/
4.Drishti Judiciary, ‘Landmark Judgments – Vishaka & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan (1997)’ https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/landmark-judgement/constitution-of-india/vishaka-&-ors-v-state-of-rajasthan-1997
5.LawBhoomi, ‘Case Analysis – Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan’ https://lawbhoomi.com/case-analysis-vishakha-v-state-of-rajasthan/ accessed 30 October 2025.
