Vishakha Social Rights

1450 Words6 Pages

A social worker being brutally gang raped in Rajasthan caused social activists and NGOs to file a petition, particularly with the aim of doing away with social injustice especially to women; which subsequently led to the judgment for the case of Vishakha v State of Rajasthan. This was the first of such judgments to lay down guidelines for protection of women at workplace, prior to which there had been no legislation laying down rules to ensure prevention of sexual harassment of women or safeguarding women’s rights against the same. The judgment, with a description of the acts that are to fall squarely within the definition of ‘sexual harassment’, inter alia states how there should be a spread of awareness of rights of female employees within …show more content…

Salmond defined a legal right as an interest protected and recognised by a rule of justice , further emphasising on the fact that ‘there can be no right without a corresponding duty’ . The Vishakha judgment talks about violation of art 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution which confer to all Indians inalienable fundamental rights in the form of right to equality, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex, rights to freedom and right to life respectively; which cannot be taken away even by legislation. When an individual owns any of these rights, there originates a corresponding duty in others to allow the enjoyment of such rights and abstain from causing restrictions to the same, whereby, rights of one imply an absence of liberty in another to hamper the enjoyment of such rights . Sexual harassment of a woman at her workplace clearly indicates gender discrimination, thereby violation of art 14 of the Constitution. Furthermore, art 15 which guarantees no discrimination on the basis of sex also gets violated in the same light. The fundamental right of a person to ‘practise any profession, or to carry out any occupation, trade or business ’ remains unfulfilled under violation of art 19 (1) (g). Art 21 that guarantees right to live with dignity and right to safety under the ambit of right to life gets brutally violated when an individual does not get to work in a safe working environment. The basic individual right owned by one to protect one’s body from abuse gets violated owing to the absence of a legislation restricting such abuse. It is a part of the objective as well as a duty of the judiciary to ensure such violations do not occur; that such rights are successfully enjoyed by the owners. Accordingly, with a view to bridge such legislative gap, fulfil the judiciary’s objective and carry out such duty, the judgment puts forward a

Open Document