Medha Kotwal Case

Case Analysis
Medha Kotwal lele

v.
Union of India & Others
INTRODUCTION
This case is a Writ Petition (Criminal) Nos. 173-177 of 1999.
Even after the court laid down the guidelines to prevent sexual
harassment in workplace in 1997 under the case of Vishaka and
others vs the state of Rajasthan and others, still many women
struggle to get their basic right in the public or private
workplace. This case raises the fundamental question about the
protection of women against sexual harassment in workplace and
its reality in our country. This is the matter of public litigation as
it throws light on the pressing need of proper implementation of
Vishaka Guidelines in its letter.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The appellant was associate in an There were frequent cases of
organisation called Alochana. harassment and demeaning dignity of
They raised the voice against sexual women.
harassment which was faced by women Even after the Vishaka guidelines,
in workplace. women were prone to sexual
They called attention of the court harassment in workplace.
towards rising concern of lack in laws
and protection.
ISSUES OF THE CASE
• Against the backdrop of the legal and therefore the
extra-legal mechanisms, whether the individual
government of every state has made appropriate
changes within the principles and policies of their
functioning vis-a-vis the recommendations issued
by the hon’ble Supreme Court of India in 1997 by
the name of Vishaka Guidelines?
• The matter was heard by division bench of three

judges where light was thrown on facts and figures,
argumentation of both sides and the true intent of
relevant legislature.
ARGUMENT FROM APELLANT
SIDE
 They argued that case’s central point is ineffective and improper
execution of Vishaka guidelines.
 The Vishaka guideline do not align with the ground realities.
 They presented statistics to support their argument.
 In United Nations, Gender Equality Index out of the entire 147
nations the rank of India is 129.
 This statistics is rock bottom for South Asian countries
 It also can be substantiated by the representation of girls within the
Parliament and Legislative Assemblies.
 It accounts for less than 10-11 percent of the entire seats.
 Vishaka guidelines aim to redress harassment and
 it lays down that the workplace needs to have a secure
environment for ladies to figure with respect, honor, and civility.
ARGUMENT FROM APELLANT
SIDE
As per the directions of the Court, the respondents
had to reply to the Court concerning the
contentions of the appellants, meaning thereby,
that each of the governments of states and
governments of union territories had to file an
affidavit. The affidavit would indicate the status of
implementation of Vishaka guidelines in their
respective states or union territories.
VIEW OF THE COURT
 The Court stated that the Vishaka Guidelines had to be
implemented in form, substance and spirit in order to
help bring gender parity by ensuring women can work
with dignity, decency and due respect
 It noted that the Vishaka Guidelines require both
employers and other responsible persons or institutions
to observe them and to help prevent sexual harassment
of women.
 “Violence against women both violates and impairs or
nullifies the enjoyment by women of human rights and
fundamental freedoms (...) in all societies, to a greater or
lesser degree, women and girls are subjected to physical,
sexual and psychological abuse that cuts across lines of
income, class and culture”
 Finally, the Court stated that, in the event of non-
compliance to the Vishaka Guidelines, the Courts orders
and/or directions above, aggrieved persons should
approach the High Court of the state concerned.
Laws in this case
 Article 141 Constitution of India
 The Vishaka Guidelines
 Protection of Women against Sexual Harassment Bill 2010 (the Bill)
 Central Civil Service (conduct) Rules, 1964 (CCS Rules)
 Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules.
CONCLUSION
This case gives us the conclusion that making laws is not sufficient,
we need to make a structure for proper enforcement and
implementation of such laws so that women can be safe and sound
in the workplace. The PIL has helped us many times in checking
the implementation of laws in real life.
It is the duty of the court to re-check and implement the structure
so that each law is followed properly in the country. The court
should also know the practical reality of law implementation in
India and work accordingly.
So, writing down the law is not sufficient, we need to act upon it.
Thanky
ou
Made By:
Bhavya Pandey
Amity Law School,
Noida

Medha Kotwal Case

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Medha Kotwal Case

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Medha Kotwal Case

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Analysis

Medha Kotwal lele

• The matter was heard by division bench of three

You might also like