Workplaces in India are changing, with women taking up roles in every sector from corporate offices to gig platforms. Yet, safety and dignity at work remain serious challenges. Recent studies show that nearly 70% of women do not report harassment, primarily due to fears of retaliation, career damage, or social stigma.
To address this, India enacted the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013—popularly known as the POSH Act. Born from the Supreme Court’s Vishaka Guidelines (1997), this Act aims to ensure a safe, equal, and harassment-free workplace for women.
More than a decade later, compliance remains inconsistent. Despite the strong framework, many institutions—both private and public—fall short in constituting Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) or following mandated procedures. In 2023, the Supreme Court of India flagged “serious lapses” and issued directions for strict compliance, reinforcing POSH as a critical and dynamic field of workplace law.
The POSH Act, 2013 broadly defines sexual harassment, including unwanted physical contact, demands for sexual favors, sexually colored remarks, showing pornography, or other unwelcome behaviors.
Key features:
Internal Complaints Committees (ICC): Every workplace with 10+ employees must have one, headed by a senior woman and including an external expert.
Local Committees: For workplaces with fewer than 10 employees or in the unorganized sector.
Employer Duties: Displaying policies, training employees, and ensuring zero-tolerance.
IPC Link: Serious misconduct (e.g., Section 354A IPC) can trigger criminal investigation.
While the law is robust on paper, courts have highlighted persistent gaps in implementation.
Indian courts have actively intervened to fortify the enforcement of workplace protections for women:
Supreme Court (2023): Directed all States and Union Territories to verify and report ICC constitution, and demanded regular updates to websites with contact details and complaint procedures. The Court also advocated for the SheBox portal and district-wise ICC surveys for compliance.
Delhi High Court (2025): Rolled out a dedicated POSH online portal, streamlining complaint filing and improving confidentiality and transparency in grievance handling.
Madras High Court (recent): Held that the victim’s impact is paramount over the accused’s intention, preventing deflection via “joking” or “casual remarks.”
Gujarat High Court (2022): Recognized digital/virtual harassment (e.g., through emails and texts) as covered under the POSH Act.
Delhi High Court (2023): Set guidelines for confidentiality and anonymity of victims, though the Act itself does not explicitly mandate anonymity, courts have protected victim identities and sealed records in sensitive case management.
These judgments demonstrate that the judiciary is proactively advancing the true spirit and reach of the POSH Act.
The Vishaka judgment (1997) first held sexual harassment at work to be a violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, and 21. It mandated workplaces to create complaint mechanisms. Following persistent non-compliance, the Supreme Court in Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India (2012) directed stricter implementation, leading Parliament to promulgate the POSH Act, 2013.
Section 2(n): Defines sexual harassment to cover physical, verbal, or non-verbal acts, unwelcome remarks, gestures, or hostile environments.
Coverage: Extends to formal and informal sectors, including domestic workers and gig economy participants.
Recognizes digital/virtual harassment.
Applies to all workplaces, public or private.
Judicial interpretation centers victim impact and confidentiality.
Many organizations, including universities and mid/small businesses, lack functioning ICCs or report zero cases for years despite legal mandate and penalties.
Underreporting persists due to stigma and fear.
Millions of informal workers lack effective redress.
Counter-complaints and misuse allegations discourage genuine cases.
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997, SC): Established foundational guidelines for workplace harassment prevention.
Apparel Export Promotion Council v. A.K. Chopra (1999, SC): Attempt to molest = harassment; broadened scope beyond physical acts.
Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India (2012, SC): Mandated ICCs and highlighted systemic failures.
Dr. Punita K. Sodhi v. Union of India (2010, Delhi HC): Emphasized independent, fair inquiries.
Shanta Kumar v. CSIR (2015, Delhi HC): Drew line between harassment and casual disputes.
India has not ratified ILO Convention 190 on workplace harassment, though it ratified other ILO conventions relating to labor rights. Globally, countries mandate workplace reporting, strict liability, and stronger audit regimes. The **#MeToo movementn India drove greater awareness and compliance, with companies taking harassment policies more seriously.
Awareness & Training: Frequent workshops, especially for ICCs.
Central Monitoring: A national POSH portal, as championed by courts.
Whistleblower Protection: Strong safeguards against retaliation.
Expand Coverage: Inclusion of gig workers, political parties, and armed forces (currently under debate; recently the SC declined PIL to include political parties within POSH).
Annual Audits: Penalty for non-functioning ICCs.
A harassment-free workplace is not only a legal obligation but a moral imperative.
The POSH Act remains one of the strongest workplace safety laws globally, yet suffers from implementation gaps. Courts have bridged some divides, from Vishaka to Aureliano Fernandes, but extending protections to lawyers, gig workers, and other vulnerable groups—and enforcing ICC compliance—remains India’s unfinished agenda. A truly safe workplace for all women calls for collective, sustained responsibility from employers, the State, and the judiciary.
