Author: Sanya Wadhwa, 2nd year LLB student of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Law University, Jaipur
 
CASE CITATION:
AIR 1997 SC 3011, (1997) 6 SCC 241
Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011, (1997) 6 SCC 241 is a landmark judgement. This court has issued set of guidelines known as Vishakha guidelines for preventing sexual harassment against women at the workplace, as there were no such specific laws in India at the time to address these issues. This case is  highly recognised for its contribution in forming the legal framework for gender equality and safety at the workplace in India.

Background:
The Vishakha vs. State of Rajasthan case emerged in the wake of the gang rape of the lady named Bhanwari Devi, a community worker from Rajasthan employed under a government in order to stop child marriages and dowry.  When in 1992 she tried to prevent a child marriage in her family, she was brutally gang raped by a group of men from one of the village of Rajasthan. However, the trial court acquitted the accused, exposing the systemic failure to protect women and address workplace harassment.
The incident ignited nationwide outrage, and a women’s group led by Naina Kapur and Sakshi, filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court seeking for the remedy. Their aim was to highlight the unnoticed issue for sexual harassment and seek protection for women at workplaces and to enforce gender equality as guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.

Facts of the Case:
Bhanwari Devi who was a social activist/worker in one of Rajasthan’s villages. She worked under a social development program at rural level which was about to stop child marriage in a village and this social program was administered/initiated by the Rajasthan’s state government.
Bhanwari Devi tried to stop the marriage of the Ramkaran Gujjars (thakurs) daughter, who was merely less than one year old i.e. she was an infant only.
As a part of her duty, Bhanwari Devi tried to terminate the marriage of her infant daughter.
Even in her vain-full efforts to stop the marriage, it happened, but Bhanwari devi was not excused or pardoned for this.
She was exposed to or put forward to social punishment or boycott.
September 1992, she was been gang raped by Ramkaran Gujjar and his five friends in front of her husband.
The male doctor at normal primary health center declined to survey her and the doctor at Jaipur only made confirmation of her age without any recommendation of her being raped in her medical report.
At the police station too she was continually taunted by the women countable for the whole midnight.
At midnight she was asked by the policeman to leave her lehenga as evidence of that incident and go back to her village.
After that, she was only left with the bloodstained dhoti of her husband to wrap her body, as a result of which they had to spend their whole night in that police station.
The Trial Court made the discharge of the accused people for not being guilty.
The High Court in his judgement propounded that  it was a case of gang rape which was conducted out of revengeful situation.
All these statement and judgement, aroused women and NGO’S to file petition (PIL) in Supreme Court of India.
 

Issue Presented:
The primary issue before the Court was:
Whether the decision given by the trial Court in the said case is violative of Bhanwari Devi’s fundamental rights guaranteed to her within Article 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21?
Whether the court could apply international laws in the absence of applicable measures under the existing?
Whether the employer has any responsibility when sexual harassment is done to/by its employees?

Arguments:
Petitioners’ Arguments (Vishakha and NGOs):
Violation/Infringement of Fundamental Rights:
Sexual harassment violates women’s fundamental rights under:
Article 14: Right to equality.
Article 15: Prohibition of discrimination based on gender.
Article 19(1)(g): Right to practice any profession.
Article 21: Right to life and personal dignity.
The petitioners brought the attention of the Hon’ble Court to the loophole that the legislation has regarding the provision of a safe working environment for women. They requested the Hon’ble Court to frame guidelines for preventing sexual harassment at the workplace.
2. No specific legislation regarding sexual harassment at the workplace
The petitioners further contended that there is no specific legislation on the said issue for the protection of women from sexual harassment at the workplace and this led to an unsafe environment for them, which makes it more challenging for the women to do jobs. It also hinders the process of living a meaningful life.
3. Role of International Conventions
It was argued that, as India has also ratified to the Convention on the Elimination on all forms of Discrimination Against Women, 1949 (CEDAW) it is the obligation of the government to implement laws that can eradicate the gender discrimination and acts of sexual harassment at the workplace committed against women.
4. Duty of the judiciary
The petitioners further contended that it becomes the duty or obligation of the Court to implement rules and regulations that can help in eradicating such crimes when there is no specific legislation dealing with the said issue.
Respondents’ Arguments (State of Rajasthan):
The learned Solicitor General, appearing on behalf of the respondents (with their consent) in this case, did something unusual, i.e., supported the petitioners. The respondent assisted the Hon’ble Court in figuring out an effective method to curb sexual harassment and in structuring the guidelines for the prevention of the same. Fali S. Nariman – the amicus curiae of the Hon’ble Court, along with Ms. Naina Kapur and Ms. Meenakshi provided assistance to the Hon’ble Court in dealing with the said case. The respondents suggested that the states should mention the information in their reports about sexual harassment and necessary measures to protect women from such acts and from other kind of violence that happens at workplace.

Relevant Legal Provisions:
The Vishaka & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan case of 1997 involved several legal provisions, including: Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India: The petitioners argued that these articles protect women’s fundamental rights and that sexual harassment at the workplace violates them. Article 15 of the Constitution of India: This article prohibits discrimination based on sex, among other factors. Article 42 of the Constitution of India: This article requires the state to provide just and humane working conditions and maternity relief. Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women, 1949 (CEDAW): Article 11 of this convention is relevant to the case.

Court Decision:
On August 13, 1997, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment. The key decisions were:
Recognition of Sexual Harassment as Rights Violation:
Sexual harassment at the workplace violates women’s fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
Vishakha Guidelines:
Until appropriate legislation was enacted, the Court established binding guidelines for addressing workplace sexual harassment:
Establish complaint committees to address grievances.
Ensure that such committees were headed by women and involved third-party members to prevent bias
Implement measures to raise awareness about sexual harassment and the procedures to report it.
Binding Nature:
The guidelines were declared legally binding under Article 141, which makes Supreme Court decisions the law of the land.

Reasoning of the Court:
Constitutional Duty:
The Court held that the State has a constitutional duty to create an environment where women can work with dignity and without fear.
Judicial Activism:
In the absence of specific legislation, the Court stepped in to fill the legal vacuum and protect fundamental rights.
International Obligations:
As a signatory to CEDAW, India is bound to implement measures to eliminate discrimination and harassment against women.

Basic Structure Doctrine and its Relevance:
The judgement indirectly touches on the basic structure doctrine, which protects fundamental rights and the rule of law.The sexual harassment against women violates their fundamental rights that have been provided under the Part III of the Indian Constitution within Articles 14 and 21 i.e., the right to equality and the right to live with dignity respectively. The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.
Equal protection of the Laws: This part means that the same law will be applied to all the people equally across the society. This is a positive concept as it expects a positive action from the state. This is a procedural part of article 14.
Protection of life and personal liberty: No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the fundamental right to protection of life and personal liberty. It ensures certain safeguards against arbitrary deprivation of life and liberty.

Impact and Significance:
Immediate Impact:
The Vishakha Guidelines became a milestone in addressing workplace sexual harassment in India.
Employers across the country were mandated to implement the guidelines, ensuring safer workplaces for women.
Legislative Development:
The judgment paved the way for the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013, which provided a comprehensive legal framework for addressing workplace harassment.
Awareness and Accountability:
The case raised public awareness about workplace harassment and placed the onus on employers to ensure compliance.
Judicial Activism:
The case showcased the judiciary’s proactive role in addressing gender-based issues and upholding constitutional values.

Critical Analysis:
 
Through the Vishaka Case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India took a great step towards the empowerment of women by issuing guidelines to curb sexual harassment at the workplace. The Hon’ble Court took reference from various international conventions and laws in the absence of domestic law, then connected it to the law of the land and gave birth to a new law altogether. The efforts put in by the Indian judiciary in this particular case to safeguard women are commendable. The Hon’ble Court, through the Vishaka Guidelines, provided a strong legal platform for all the women to fight against sexual harassment boldly. The Vishaka case changed the outlook towards sexual harassment cases as serious issues, unlike in the past when such cases were looked upon as petty matters. Like every coin has its two sides, based on the Vishaka case, one can figure out that though India tried to overcome the social evils of gender inequality and sexual harassment by providing employment and provisions of law, it did not succeed in taking social responsibility for an equally safe working environment. Even after having the law on our side to safeguard women, there are many inciders of sexual harassment taking place regularly which go unreported. As a small example, let us assume that a woman finally gets her dream job in a software company. The woman is subjected to sexual harassment. She wants to go and lodge a complaint against the one who harassed her, but she chooses not to do it. She is worried that if she complains, then she might not be able to continue working in the company because her family members might stop her. Why? because their family fears that the woman has been harassed once, so she might be harassed again. The concern of people even today is that the females in their house must learn to adjust until they are in a “safe” environment according to their parameters. Not that the person who harassed her must be punished for what he has done and to see to it that he does not repeat it. Though there are remedies available under the law, for women facing sexual harassment at work, the “safety” is not assured even after so many years. There is a need for various Guidelines and an Act just to safeguard women on the working front. Why is it so hard for a woman to achieve the same freedom and opportunities that a man gets with not much of an effort?