Vishaka and others V. State of Rajasthan and others

CASE BRIEF : Vishaka and others V. State of Rajasthan and others (1997) Citation – AIR 1997 SC 3011

Court Name – Supreme Court of India

Judges- Chief Justice J.S. Verma, Justice Sujata Manohar, Justice B.N. Kirpal Bench Type -Division Bench 

Date of Judgement – 13 August 1997 

Parties Involved

1. Petitioner – Vishaka and others . Vishaka was a Non- Government Organization in Rajasthan which works for upliftment and welfare for the women led by Naina Kapur and Sakshi .
2. Respondent -State of Rajasthan and Union of India.

Facts of the Case 

Bhanwari Devi , a government employee working in the women development project , took  issue to campaign against child marriage , but during this a incident took place and she was  brutally gang raped by a group of men . The trial Court refused to believe on the statement of  Bhanwari devi . Lower court failed to give justice to the victim and the accused were acquitted  by the court. This led to the national protests where NGOs together Filed an Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in violation of fundamentalrightslike Articles 14 ,15 ,19 ,21 of the constitution of India , and also raised the issue of sexual harassment at workplace . The petition resulted  in issuing of Vishaka guidelines by the Supreme court division bench in 1997 an image of  victory of women groups who are against the sexual harassment . After the landmark  judgement in this case , Government of India implemented the Sexual Harassment of women  at workplace ( Prevention , Prohibition and Redressal ) Act , 2013 ,²this act helped many  women who are the victims .

Issue Raised

1. Whether the place , wherein the women are working does have any rule or regulations for the protection of the women form sexual harassment or acts .
2. Is Supreme court of India have the power to make guidelines to protect the women in the absence of any formal act or rules made by the parliament or legislation . 
3. Does International treaties or convention can be enforced without the formal  implementation of law made by the government of India .

Arguments of the Parties 

1. Petitioners Arguments

Petitioner filed a writ petition of Mandamus under article 32 of the Constitution of India  . The main problem or issued made by the petitioner through Organization before the  court was the violation of the basic fundamental rights like Article 14( Right to Equality )  ,Article 15( Prohibition of Discrimination) ,Article 19 (1) (g) Right to profession , and most  important Article 21 ( Right to life and personal Liberty ) which led to happening of the  incident in this case . There were absence of any law or act that is mentioning the  protection of women working at the workplace .The petitioner also argued that is the  duty of the judiciary to work at the upfront if there is no legalisation for it ,and make  guidelines before any incidents took place . Petitioner also asked the court for  Government of India , had signed the Convention on the Elimination on all forms of  Discrimination Against Women , 1994 (CEDAW) ³, which sets the obligation on the  government to make or implement laws regarding the discrimination against the women  . The petitioners also give the reference of the case Minister of immigration and Ethnic  Affairs v. Teror (1995)⁴ held that when the country’s own law is not there then ,court  can rely on international convention to make judgement . Petitioner also raised the  issues of lack of cooperation between government departments and lack of support 

2. Respondent Arguments

State of Rajasthan and Union of India representative the learnt counsel took an step that  was not anticipated by anyone .Instead of arguing in front of court for the respondent  side , counsel gave unwavering support to make law or guidelines for the protection of  the Women from sexual harassment at workplace , accepted the wrong that happened  with victim . It was mentioned by the counsel that states should mention the information  of sexual harassments of women in their reports and also measures that can be taken .  Respondents also stated the court of full support by parliament and others departments  .

Judgement of the case 

The honourable supreme court of India stated the in this that there was a violation of  fundamental rights like Article 14 ,19 and most important Article 21( Right to life and personal  Liberty ) and also includes right to safe environment at workplace .Court also stated that in  the absence of any legislation in the country , judiciary can take the international convention  . The Beijing Statement of Principles on the independence of judiciary were cited by the  court . Court also laid on the emphasises the use of Public Interest litigation (PIL) , which was  used in this case and presents a meaningful impact on the society . Judges also told the  parliament to make the legislation on protection of the women at the workplace from sexual  harassment . The supreme court also laid that is the duty of the employer to take necessary  steps for the women working at their workplace to protect them form the sexual harassment and acts. In further Supreme court of India laid the landmark Vishaka Guidelines which will  apply to every work place both private (Unorganized , NGOs) and public to prevent the  women form sexual harassment. Court also regarded to the respondents that this case should  be taken seriously not as usual happening .

Vishakha Guidelines :

1. There Should be a procedure or mechanism to deals with cases related with cases of sexual harassment of women at workplace .
2. Conditions at working place should be appropriate like , health facilities and workplace should be safe , is the duty of the employer .
3. The court basically stated sexual harassment is a sign of uncomfortable behaviour of act which also includes physical acts , showing sexually Favors and showing pornographic content at the workplace .
4. Employers should act against the misconduct or any disciplinary actions at work place with women .
5. Sexual Harassment complaints committee should be there and this be headed by the women employee and also should include third party as NGOs .

Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention , Prohibition ,Redressal )  Act , 2013 

Further after the judgment and the implementation of the Vishaka guidelines ,  Sexual harassment became a national issue . For this the government had to make  and present a law that is called Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace  (Prevention , Prohibition ,Redressal ) Act , 2013 , which was implemented and also  called POSH ACT ,2013 .The main goal to make this law is to promote and provide  gender equality at the workplace and have a safe environment at the place . This act  enforced had a small but needed impact on the society on the subject for the  protection of women from sexual harassment at the workplace .It also laid the duties  of the employers that should be enforced at the work place for making safe  environment .

Conclusion

Through the Vishaka vs state of Rajasthan and others case , it led to highlight a deep  issue that wavering in our society for the safety of our women working at the  workplace . The supreme court of India took an impressive step towards this incident  by issuing Vishakh guidelines , which was a landmark decision . The court also  influenced by the international convention and issued a interim solution for it .  Despite this guidelines women , now a days also faces many challenges at the  workplace but they don’t tell to the employers due to the society pressure . The  guidelines also gave the duty to the employer for making a safe work environment for  women . It is also told now days this issue will not be vanished from our society  ,without the help of all communities from society .Vishaka Guidelines help to make  the foundation for the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention ,  Prohibition ,Redressals ) Act , 2013 .The step of the respondents also help to fast up  the case speed and also provided the necessary mechanism to make the guidelines by  the Judiciary .One questions it raises that only making law or legalisation will that be  only for protection of the women at the workplace . Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of  India (2012)⁵ was case of similar issue after the issuing of Vishaka guidelines where the  justice to the women were not served and court criticized the poor implementation of the Visaka guidelines .Rather we have to make awareness at the grassroot level  about the sexual harassment cases , which will have more impact in the rural areas  where this incident took place more often .

Reference(S):

¹ Aryan Raj is a first year law student at National Forensics Sciences University Delhi .

²Shubhada Son walker and Jacob Michael , Sexual Harassment of women at workplace ( Prevention ,  Prohibition and Redressal ) Act , 2013 ,IPLEADERS ,(Feb 20 ,2020 ), https://blog.ipleaders.in/sexual-harassment of-women-at-workplace-prevention-prohibition-and-redressal-act-2013/

³United Nations Convention on Elimination of All forms of Discrimination against women,  https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/

⁴Sai Gayatri , Vishaka and others V. State of Rajasthan and others (1997),IPLEADERS ,(Sep 16 ,2024)  ,https://blog.ipleaders.in/vishaka-ors-vs-state-of-rajasthan-ors-1997/from them and also led that the accused were acquitted from the trial after few hours  and also raised questions on the working of trial court .

⁵Saswata Tewari ,Key Judicial Precedents on Sexual Harassment in India ,IPLEADERS ,(Mar,20 ,2021)  ,https://blog.ipleaders.in/key-judicial-precedents-sexual-harassment-india/