Case Summary: Vishakha and others V. State of Rajasthan and others  AIR 1997 SC 3011 

Court : Supreme Court of India  

Bench : J.S. Verma CJI, Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, B.N. Kirpal 

Date of Judgement : August 13, 1997  

Relevant provisions/ Statutes : Article 14, 15(1), 19 (1)(g), 21 of the Indian Constitution  

Brief Facts 

There was the village named Bhateri in Rajasthan and Bhanwari Devi was the social worker  working under a government initiated Women’s Development Project in the village. She  campaigned mainly against the Child Marriage in her locality. 

In 1992, she tried to prevent the Child Marriage in the upper caste family of Ram Karan Gujars where the family was trying to marry their daughter who was not yet completed her 1 year of  birth. Hence, due to the opposition by the Bhanwari Devi to this child Marriage she, suffered a lot. 

On September 22, 1992 a group of five men including Ram Karan Gujar gang raped her in front of her husband as punishment for her efforts. The medical examination of the Bhanwari Devi  was delayed by over 50 hours and the complaint filing was also significantly delayed by the  police ,as they were unwilling to take a case of gang rape seriously. The trial court acquitted all  the accused individuals due to the lack of evidence. After the acquittal of all the accused there  was the outrage in the village women’s and the women’s organisations. 

The PIL was filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution by the women’s rights groups led  by NGO Sakshi with Naina Kapoor as a key figure. The PIL highlighted the need for legal  measures to protect women from sexual harassment at work. 

Issues Raised 

• Whether the acquittal of the accused and the subsequent salvation from the non providing and  safe working environment for the women could take to the character of the violation of the  fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14, 15(1), 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Indian  Constitution?
• Whether in the absence of any statutory provisions on the subject of sexual harassment in a  work environment , the judiciary would have geared themselves to lay down any guidelines (  known as Vishakha Guidelines) binding in nature to protect the rights of women’s ? •Whether an employer has in built responsibilities as at a very minimum to provide and maintain  a very safe working environment and to inhibit sexual harassment so that a women’s right to  work would be respected and upheld? 
• Whether in absence of local enactment, international treaties and norms primarily on the  subjects of women’s rights (such as the CEDAW) could serve as aid for the court to interpret and  enforce constitutional guarantees? 

ARGUMENTS  

By Petitioners 

• The petitioner in this case argued that there was the direct infringement of the fundamental  rights in the Indian Constitution of Article 14 which says about the right to equality, Article  19(1)(g) which is Right to practice any profession , or to carry on any occupatio, trade or  business and Article 21 which talks about Right to life and liberty with dignity and security.
• Secondly, the petitioner argued about the specific guidelines must be required so to fill the  legislative void and act as a interim arrangement for the exact of the specific law.
• Thirdly, reliance of the International norms like the CEDAW the petitioner argued that the constitutional guarantees must be interpreted in the light of international norms. 

By Respondents  

The Solicitor general from the respondent side sought to support in this case.

• Firstly, they argued about the judicial responsibility in the absence of legislation. In the absence  of any recognition by the legislation such an act should be remitted by Article 32 judicially.
• Secondly, the respondent argued regarding the employers Accountability. They argued that it’s  the moral responsibility of the employers to provide the safe working environment and there  must be proper redressal committee that would look upon on the proper monitoring, prevention  and prompt action in the cases of sexual harassment.
• They also argued that there must be reinforcement of the incorporation of international  conventions regarding the women’s rights into domestic law. 

Judgement

Some of the key aspects regarding this case judgement are as follows: 

• Violation of fundamental rights 
• Vishakha Guidelines  
• Definition of Sexual Harassment 
• Employers Responsibility  
• Establishment of Complaint Committee  

The Supreme Court ruled that the sexual harassment in this case would be the violation of  fundamental rights of the women relating the Article 14,15(1), 19(1)(g) and Article 21 of the  Indian Constitution. 

They also ruled the Vishakha Guidelines in this case . Although the Supreme Court cannot make  the laws but can issue guidelines under Article 142 of the Indian Constitution. They set the  guidelines in the year 1997.

Key aspects of Vishakha Guidelines included:

• Definition of Sexual Harassment 
• Complaint redressal mechanism  
• Protection for Aggrieved Women 
• Wide ranging workplace definition  

Hence, the main objective of issuing this guidelines by the Supreme Court was to provide legal  recourse in the absence of specific legislation for sexual harassment cases. Also the court  declared that until the Parliament enacts the comprehensive law the Vishakha Guidelines laid  down by it would be binding on all employers , whether in public service or private. The Supreme Court also used the International Convention i.e. CEDAW aa the supplementary  source in the Domestic law so that the rights of the women’s are get protected. The judgment was a landmark decision. These guidelines served as the legal framework for  workplace safety for women for many years and were later superseded by the Sexual Harassment  of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act in 2013.

Ratio Decidendi 

The Court emphasized that the absence of specific legislation did not absolve the State of its  responsibility to protect citizens. It used its power to interpret international conventions and  norms to define sexual harassment and establish procedural safeguards, essentially creating a de  facto law. The Court’s ratio decidendi, or core reasoning, was that there was no specific law  addressing workplace sexual harassment, creating a gap that violated constitutional guarantees of gender equality and the right to a safe and dignified working environment. To fill this gap, the  Court issued the Vishakha Guidelines, establishing employers’ responsibilities and procedures  for preventing and addressing sexual harassment. These guidelines served as the legal framework  for workplace safety for women for many years and were later superseded by the Sexual  Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act in 2013. 

Final Decision  

In Vishakha vs. State of Rajasthan (1997), the Supreme Court of India delivered the Vishakha Guidelines, establishing that sexual harassment at the workplace infringes upon women’s  fundamental rights to equality, dignity, and freedom. The guidelines defined sexual harassment  and mandated that employers in both public and private sectors must form internal committees to  address complaints, ensuring a safe working environment. These guidelines served as de facto  law until the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act was enacted in 2013.  The judgement given by the Bench of J.S. Verma, Sujata V Manohar and B.N. Kirpal in this  case would be seen as a significant legal victory for women’s groups in India. Also , this landmark case in the legal landscape of India provides transparency and safeguards  against sexual harassment of women in workplace .  

The decision also highlighted the importance of the secure and dignified working environment  for women.