In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has emphasized the need for a balanced approach in handling sexual harassment complaints, cautioning against both the trivialization of genuine cases and the misuse of laws for false allegations. The apex court underscored the importance of scrutinizing the veracity of complaints to prevent the misuse of laws meant to protect against sexual harassment, while also ensuring that legitimate cases are not hindered by hyper-technicalities.
Also read- Supreme Court Revises ‘Sex Worker’ Terminology In Gender Stereotypes Handbook (lawchakra.in)
Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, leading the bench, stated,
“Sexual harassment in any form at the workplace must be viewed seriously and the harasser should not be allowed to escape from the clutches of law.”
However, he also highlighted the need for careful examination of complaints, adding,
“The veracity and genuineness of the complaint should be scrutinized to prevent any misuse of such laudable laws… lest justice rendering system would become a mockery.”
This directive came during the court’s ruling on an appeal filed by the Union government against a Gauhati High Court judgment. The High Court had set aside a penalty imposed on a retired Service Selection Board officer, Dilip Paul, accused of sexually harassing a female field officer. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court had overly focused on technicalities, failing to consider the broader principles of justice.
Justice JB Pardiwala, writing for the bench, remarked on the pervasive issue of sexual harassment, stating,
“Sexual harassment is a pervasive and deeply rooted issue… In India, it has been a matter of serious concern, and the development of laws to combat sexual harassment is a testament to the nation’s commitment towards addressing this problem.”
Also read- Parliamentary Committee Proposes Key Amendments In New Criminal Law Bill (lawchakra.in)
The Supreme Court criticized the High Court’s approach, which it saw as reducing the complaints committee to a mere recording machine. The apex court stressed that such committees, acting as inquiry authorities, should have the freedom to question witnesses to ensure a fair and thorough inquiry.
The bench also referred to a 2021 judgment by CJI Chandrachud, warning against hyper-technical interpretations of service rules that could invalidate proceedings inquiring into sexual misconduct. In the case at hand, the accused officer faced an inquiry from the Service Selection Board following a complaint from the victim in August 2011. The central complaints committee, constituted under the Central Service Rules Grievance Redressal Mechanism order of 2006, found the officer guilty on 10 counts.
This judgment by the Supreme Court highlights the delicate balance required in handling sexual harassment cases, ensuring that while genuine victims receive justice, the laws are not misused to settle personal scores or for other ulterior motives.