Supreme Court of India during the landmark Vishaka judgment (1997), which laid the foundation for workplace sexual harassment laws in India.
VISHAKA AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
GIST OF THE CASEVishaka and Others v. State of Rajasthan (1997) was a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India that addressed the issue of sexual harassment of women at the workplace in the absence of specific legislation. Triggered by the gang rape of a social worker, Bhanwari Devi, while performing her official duties, the case was filed as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by NGOs and women’s rights groups. The Supreme Court, using its constitutional powers under Articles 32 and 141, laid down binding Vishaka Guidelines to safeguard women’s right to a safe working environment, recognizing such harassment as a violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g), and 21. The Court also integrated international conventions like CEDAW into its reasoning, emphasizing India’s commitment to global human rights standards. |
Legal Issues
- Whether sexual harassment at the workplace violates Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution?
- Can the Supreme Court frame binding guidelines in the absence of legislation to ensure protection against sexual harassment at the workplace?
- What is the extent of India’s obligation under international conventions (e.g., CEDAW) regarding workplace gender equality?
Time Line
| Date | Event |
| 1992 | Bhanwari Devi gang-raped in Rajasthan. |
| 1997 | PIL filed by NGOs including Vishaka seeking guidelines on sexual harassment. |
| 13 Aug 1997 | Supreme Court delivers landmark judgment, lays down Vishaka Guidelines. |
| 2004 | Supreme Court reiterates Vishaka Guidelines in Medha Kotwal Lele case and directs strict compliance. |
| 2013 | Parliament enacts “The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act” based on Vishaka Guidelines. |
Judgment Summary
Majority Opinion:
- The Court recognized that sexual harassment at workplace violates gender equality and the right to life with dignity under Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g), and 21.
- In the absence of legislative measures, the Court used its powers under Article 32 and its obligation to enforce fundamental rights to frame binding guidelines.
- Referred to international instruments, especially CEDAW, to emphasize India’s obligation to protect women’s rights.
- Laid down the Vishaka Guidelines, including:
- Definition of sexual harassment
- Duties of employers
- Establishment of Complaints Committees
- Preventive steps and awareness measures
- Protection against third-party harassment
- Definition of sexual harassment
- Declared these guidelines to have force of law under Article 141 until legislation is enacted.
Dissenting Opinion: None – unanimous decision.
Doctrine or Principle Laid Down
Vishaka Guidelines (1997):
A judicially crafted framework ensuring protection of women from sexual harassment at workplaces in the absence of statutory law. It recognized sexual harassment as a violation of fundamental rights, integrating international obligations into domestic constitutional interpretation.
Implications:
- Enforced mandatory compliance by public and private employers.
- Treated judicial guidelines as binding law until legislation.
- Marked a proactive role of judiciary in human rights enforcement.
Importance and Impact
- Constitutional Law: Expanded interpretation of Article 21 to include right to a safe workplace; incorporated international law (CEDAW) into domestic jurisprudence.
- Legislative Practices: Prompted the enactment of the 2013 Sexual Harassment Act, institutionalizing Vishaka Guidelines.
- Judicial Review: Asserted the judiciary’s power to fill legislative gaps to enforce fundamental rights.
- Citizens’ Rights: Empowered working women with enforceable legal remedies against harassment and laid down employer responsibilities.
Relevance to Contemporary Law and Society
- Forms the foundation of workplace gender rights law in India.
- Frequently cited in cases involving sexual harassment and gender discrimination.
- The Vishaka framework remains a benchmark in sexual harassment jurisprudence, especially when the 2013 Act is under scrutiny or enforcement is lax.
- Reinforced by later judgments like Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India (2004) that pushed for effective implementation of Vishaka Guidelines across institutions.
- Continues to influence HR policies, corporate compliance, and public awareness campaigns around safe workplaces.
Current Scenario and Conclusion
Since the Vishaka judgment (1997), India has taken significant legal steps to address sexual harassment at the workplace. The most notable development is the enactment of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, which codifies the Vishaka Guidelines into binding law. This Act mandates the formation of Internal Committees in all workplaces with more than 10 employees, provides a clear definition of sexual harassment, and sets procedural safeguards for complaint resolution. Despite this legal framework, implementation remains inconsistent—many organizations, especially in the unorganized and informal sectors, either fail to constitute proper committees or do not follow due process. Courts have continued to rely on Vishaka principles to ensure justice where statutory mechanisms are weak or misused. The Supreme Court, in recent observations (2025), emphasized the persistent gaps in compliance and called for stronger enforcement and sensitization. Thus, Vishaka remains highly relevant both legally and socially, guiding institutional behavior and reinforcing women’s right to dignity at the workplace.
SOURCE – VISHAKHA vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
READ ALSO – NAVTEJ SINGH JOHAR vs. UNION OF INDIA
