Judicial Precedents On Harassment Of Women In Public Spaces
1. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997)
Context: This is a landmark case that laid down guidelines for preventing sexual harassment at the workplace, but its principles extended to public spaces and institutional settings.
Facts: The case arose after the brutal gang-rape of a social worker, Bhanwari Devi, who was working to prevent child marriage. The Supreme Court noticed the absence of any legislation or guidelines to prevent sexual harassment.
Judgment: The Supreme Court issued the Vishaka Guidelines, which are a set of preventive and redressal measures for sexual harassment, including:
Prohibition of sexual harassment.
Creation of a Complaints Committee.
Ensuring the confidentiality of complaints.
Importance for Public Spaces: Though primarily about workplace harassment, the guidelines recognized the need to protect women in all spheres, encouraging a safer environment, including public spaces.
2. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) — Right to Privacy Case
Context: Though this case primarily dealt with the right to privacy, it also impacted laws related to harassment.
Facts: The case confirmed that the right to privacy is a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that privacy includes protection against sexual harassment, which often violates a person's privacy and dignity.
Impact on Public Harassment: It reinforced the legal framework ensuring women’s autonomy and dignity, strengthening the fight against harassment in all public and private domains.
3. Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018)
Context: The Supreme Court dealt with the issue of harassment and violence against women in public spaces, especially related to "honour crimes."
Facts: The case involved crimes of violence, including harassment, committed against women who were victims of forced marriages or those who exercised their right to marry whom they chose.
Judgment: The Court emphasized the need for strict enforcement of laws protecting women from harassment and violence. It stressed that the police and authorities must act proactively to prevent harassment in public and private spaces.
Significance: Reinforced the state's responsibility in protecting women from harassment and upholding their rights in public spaces.
4. Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) — Case on Public Indecency and Harassment
Context: Though an older case, it deals with public indecency and harassment laws.
Facts: The accused was charged under sections dealing with obscene acts and causing harassment to women in public.
Judgment: The Supreme Court upheld stringent provisions of the Indian Penal Code protecting women against obscene acts and acts causing harassment in public.
Importance: Helped define the boundaries of criminal behavior in public spaces that amounts to harassment and established the principle that public harassment must be curbed by strict legal action.
5. Delhi High Court in Lukshmi v. Union of India (2012) — Public Spaces and Police Responsibility
Context: This case is important for police accountability regarding harassment in public spaces.
Facts: A woman was harassed in public, and the police did not act promptly or effectively.
Judgment: The Delhi High Court held that the police have a constitutional duty to ensure the safety and security of women in public spaces and must take immediate and effective action against harassment complaints.
Significance: This case clarified law enforcement’s role and responsibility in protecting women in public places, emphasizing accountability.
Summary:
The Vishaka Guidelines set a preventive framework for harassment.
The Right to Privacy ruling (Puttaswamy case) bolstered dignity and autonomy, critical in harassment cases.
Shakti Vahini reinforced state accountability to protect women.
Bachan Singh helped clarify criminal actions constituting harassment in public.
The Lukshmi case emphasized police duty and responsiveness in harassment cases.
These cases together create a legal framework protecting women from harassment in public spaces through preventive guidelines, criminal sanctions, and accountability of authorities.
RELATED Blog
comments