Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Places in India !
One of the evils of the modem society is the sexual harassment caused to the women particularly the working women by their male counterparts at work-places. The Supreme Court in a PIL time and again has been emphasising on the need for an effective legislation in India to curb sexual harassment of working women.
Finally, in Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan, the Court laid down guidelines to remedy the legislative vacuum on this issue. It defined “sexual harassment” as including any unwelcome sexually determined behaviour (whether directly or by implication) like physical contact and advances, a demand or request for sexual favours, sexually coloured remarks, showing pornography and any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.
As a result of this judgment any woman employee who is subjected to sexual harassment of any kind can take recourse to initiating criminal proceedings, disciplinary action and also seek compensation from the guilty employer or other person responsible for the sexual harassment.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
It is gratifying to note that the broad guidelines laid down in Vishakha’s case were applied by Bombay High Court in 1998 in the case of Mrs. Shehnaz Sani who was working as a ground hostess in Saudi Arabian Airlines of Bombay and was sexually harassed by her employer.
The Court directed the employer of Mrs. Sani to reinstate her with back wages for 13 years, during which she was rendered unemployed due to the wrongful termination of her services by her boss. This judgment has certainly set a new trend in the protection of human rights to dignity of working women in India.
The Supreme Court in Apparel Export Council v. A.K. Chopra, emphasised that in cases involving violation of human rights, the Court should be alive to the international convention and apply the same in deciding cases, particularly, those relating to violation of right to gender equality and right to life and liberty including sexual abuse and harassment of female at the work place. In this case the delinquent, a superior officer was found guilty of molesting and of having tried to physically assault a female subordinate employee.
The Court held that the act of the delinquent was wholly against moral sanctions and decency and, therefore, mere want of actual assault or bodily touch or contact does not render the punishment of removal of the delinquent from the service wholly unjustified. In other words, the conduct of the delinquent does not cease to be outrageous as it clearly amounts to sexual harassment. The appeal was, therefore, dismissed.