Right Against Sexual Harassment Part Of Right To Life & Dignity Under Article 21
Case: Union of India and Ors v. Mudrika Singh
Coram: Justices D.Y Chandrachud and A.S Bopanna
Case No.: Civil Appeal No. 6859 of 2021
Court Observation: “It is important that courts uphold the spirit of the right against sexual harassment, which is vested in all persons as a part of their right to life and right to dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution”.
“We would also like to highlight a rising trend of invalidation of proceedings inquiring into sexual misconduct, on hyper-technical interpretations of the applicable service rules. For instance, the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act 2013 penalizes several misconducts of a sexual nature and imposes a mandate on all public and private organizations to create adequate mechanisms for redressal. However, the existence of transformative legislation may not come to the aid of persons aggrieved of sexual harassment if the appellate mechanisms turn the process into a punishment.”
“It is also important to be mindful of the power dynamics that are mired in sexual harassment at the workplace. There are several considerations and deterrents that a subordinate aggrieved of sexual harassment has to face when they consider reporting sexual misconduct of their superior”
“Deeming such a trivial aspect to be of monumental relevance, while invalidating the entirety of the disciplinary proceedings against the respondent and reinstating him to his position renders the complainant’s remedy at nought. The history of legal proceedings such as these is a major factor that contributes to the deterrence that civil and criminal mechanisms pose to persons aggrieved of sexual harassment”
“The High Court, in this case, was not only incorrect in its interpretation of the jurisdiction of the Commandant and the obligation of the SSFC to furnish reasons under the BSF Act 1968 and Rules therein, but also demonstrated a callous attitude to the gravamen of the proceedings”
“The appeal is accordingly allowed and the impugned judgment and order of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court of 18 December 2018 and of the Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court on 7 May 2009 are set aside. In consequence, the writ petition filed by the respondent shall stand dismissed.”
[doc id=12419]
Previous Posts
Hostile Witness’s Credible Evidence Can Form Basis For Conviction In Criminal Trial: Supreme Court
Section 149 IPC -Merely Because A Person Disclosed Victim’s Hideout, He Can’t Be Held To Part Of Unlawful Assembly: Supreme Court Daily Judgement
