Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh
Citation(1997) 6 SCC 241, AIR 1997 SC 3011
CourtSupreme Court of India
Date13 August 1997
Year1997
BenchJ.S. Verma CJI, Sujata V. Manohar, B.N. Kirpal JJ.
Acts/ArticlesArticle 14, Article 15, Article 19(1)(g), Article 21
CategoryConstitutional Law, Women's Rights

Key Principle Established

Sexual harassment at workplace defined and guidelines issued (Vishaka Guidelines). Right to work with dignity is a fundamental right under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21.

Brief Facts

A social worker in Rajasthan was gang-raped for attempting to prevent a child marriage. Women’s groups filed a PIL seeking enforcement of the fundamental right of working women to be protected from sexual harassment.

The Vishaka Guidelines

The Supreme Court laid down binding guidelines on sexual harassment at workplace:

  • Definition: Sexual harassment includes unwelcome sexually determined behaviour — physical contact, demand for sexual favours, sexually coloured remarks, showing pornography, any unwelcome physical/verbal/non-verbal conduct of sexual nature
  • Every employer must establish a Complaints Committee headed by a woman, with at least half women members and one external member
  • Employers must prohibit sexual harassment through standing orders, service rules
  • Third party harassment must also be addressed by the employer
  • Annual reports on compliance must be filed

Impact & Significance

The Vishaka Guidelines were binding law for 16 years until replaced by the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. This judgment demonstrated the Supreme Court’s power to fill legislative vacuums through judicial law-making. It remains the most cited women’s rights judgment in India.

Tags & Related Topics

Constitutional Law Women's Rights Article 14 Article 15 Article 19(1)(g) Article 21
← Previous Judgment Vineet Narain v. Union of India (Hawala Case)

Related Judgments

1984

Neeraja Chaudhary v. State of M.P.

(1984) 3 SCC 243

Release of bonded labourers without rehabilitation is cruelty. The State must ensure identification, release AND rehabilitation of bonded labourers.

Read Analysis
1967

Satwant Singh Sawhney v. D. Ramarathnam

AIR 1967 SC 1836

Right to travel abroad is a fundamental right under Article 21. Refusal or impounding of passport without following due process…

Read Analysis
1993

Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa

AIR 1993 SC 1960

State is liable to pay compensation for custodial death as a public law remedy under Article 32/226, independent of any…

Read Analysis

Disclaimer

This judgment summary is for educational and research purposes. While care has been taken to accurately represent the ratio and findings, for authoritative reference always consult the original judgment text from official sources (SCC Online, AIR, Manupatra, or court websites).

Need Case Law Research or Legal Representation?

22+ years of practice before Punjab & Haryana High Court and Supreme Court of India.

Call: +919915442266 WhatsApp

Need Legal Assistance?

Contact Advocate Ravinder Singh Dhull for expert legal guidance on your matter.