Muskan Mittal (20010536)

Vishaka and others v. State of Rajasthan and others

AIR 1997 SC 3011

Court: The Supreme Court of India

Bench: J.S. Verma, C.J.I, Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar and B.N. Kirpal, JJ.

Facts:

Bhanwari Devi is a social worker, working for the Government of Rajasthan’s Women Development
Programme. In 2012, she was brutally gang raped in a village in Rajasthan during the course of her
employment. She is said to be gang raped by men who belonged to Gujjar community when she tried to
prevent a child marriage in their community. Social activists and NGOs moved the court to safeguard women
from hazards and harassment they are exposed to at work. A PIL was filed by social activists to protect
women from sexual harassment in workplaces. The petitioners urged the court to protect women from
harassment at workplaces in absence of legislative laws for the same.

Issues:

 Whether the Constitution of India provides for protection of women from sexual harassment at
workplace?
 Whether the international conventions and laws have relevance in the matter and can be imposed in
absence of a domestic law?
Rationale:
The court reasoned that harassment of women at work constitutes Gender Inequality and therefore violates
women’s Right to Equality guaranteed under Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India. Further, such
incidents breach the right of women to live with dignity guaranteed under Article 21. The court observes that,
for the right to practice any profession of choice, a safe working environment is necessary and therefore such
incidents are in a violation of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The court further views Article 42 to be of
relevance which provides for “just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief”, Article 51A (a)
and(e) wherein it is the duty of the citizens to abide by the constitution and promote harmony and disregard
any activity disrespectful to women.
For the second issue, the court referred to Article 51(c) of the Constitution of India. Under this Article, the
state should strive for promoting respect for international law and treaty obligations. In addition, the court
observed Article 253 which provides discretion to the government to enact any law based on international
agreement and Seventh Schedule, List 1- Union List Entry 14 which is concerned with “Entering into treaties
and agreements with foreign countries and implementing of treaties, agreements and conventions with foreign
countries.” Thus, in the absence of any domestic law, the norms and guidelines of International Conventions
are crucial in protecting the interests and rights of people.

1
Holding:
The court held that sexual harassment at workplaces violates the fundamental rights of an individual
guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and as a result issued a writ of
mandamus to the government to enforce these rights. In the absence of any existing law to protect women
from harassment at places of employment, the court laid down certain guidelines named as Vishaka guidelines
keeping in view international norms, till the time any law consistent to them is enacted.

Analysis:
This case laid down the guidelines for protection of women at their place of employment which later became a
guiding force for the legislature to pass a law to prevent sexual harassment of women at workplace in 2013.
The court protected the fundamental rights of women and came to their aid when there were no existing laws
to support them. This case was a result of Bhanwari Devi case in which she was raped during her
employment. Sexual harassment at workplaces isn’t uncommon. Many women face humiliation and
harassment by men at their places of employment. The court stated that the protection of women at work
should be guaranteed by the employer, but who will guarantee her safety when the employer is the one to
harass? There are so many women who do not come forward because of social criticisms or because of the
fear that they might get fired from their jobs. Even after so many years of this revolutionary judgement,
women face sexual harassment during their employment. So many women feel unsafe at their work and
nothing is done to comfort them. The court also deliberates that International Conventions are important to
deal with this matter because protection from sexual harassment and right to work with dignity is a basic
human right recognised globally. This is a social evil and prevents equal treatment of women. To protect
women and their fundamental rights, the court also issued a writ of mandamus to the government so that they
can enforce these rights for public interest.
The court also observed its obligation to protect the interest of people when there are no laws for that. The
objectives of judiciary under Beijing Statement became important for the court to rule in the favour of public
interest without any laws present.
3