Gender, Law and Society

UNIT 12 SEXUAL HARASSMENT AT THE

WORKPLACE
Structure
12.1 Introduction
12.2 Objectives
12.3 What is Sexual Harassment at the Workplace?
12.4 Forms of Sexual Harassment at the Workplace
12.5 Causes and Features of Sexual Harassment at the Workplace
12.6 Some Commonly held Perceptions about Sexual Harassment: Myths and
Reality
12.7 Some Case Studies on Sexual Harassment
12.8 Responses of the Law
12.9 Summing Up
12.10 Key Words
12.11 Suggested Readings
12.12 Unit End Questions

12.1 INTRODUCTION
Sexual harassment at the workplace has remained an issue of serious concern for
the women’s movement in India, as it affects the woman’s right to work and
function in a safe environment. Sexual harassment at the workplace is an extension
of sexual harassment of women in public and private spaces. As in all other
forms of harassment of violence against women, sexual harassment at the
workplace is less about sex and more about an expression and exercise of male
power over women, that subjugates women and sustains patriarchy. Sexual
harassment does not stem from men’s inability to control sexual desires; it stems
from the need of some men to assert their power and control over women,
including in educational institutions, work places and public places, and to
demonstrate male superiority. It is yet another weapon to “put women in their
place” and to “teach them a lesson” for asserting their right to life with dignity
and equality at the workplace.

A Times of India survey conducted in 2012 finds that seven out of ten women
are sexually harassed at the workplace, and that over 90% of them do not register
a police complaint because they do not think it would serve any purpose.1 The
former Union Minister for Women and Child Development, Smt. Maneka Gandhi,
said that in 2014, 526 cases of sexual harassment at the workplace had been
reported.2 Needless to say, this is only the tip of the iceberg as a majority of the
cases go unreported, for reasons discussed more elaborately below. Sexual
harassment at the workplace is discriminatory, oppressive, exploitative, causes
physical and mental trauma, and thrives in an atmosphere of fear, threat and
reprisal. While men too can sometimes become victims of sexual harassment, in
a highly patriarchal society such as in India, it is the women who bear the brunt
of this form of harassment; hence this unit focusses on sexual harassment of
women at the workplace.
142
 Sexual Harassment at
12.2 OBJECTIVES Workplace

After Completing this Unit, you will be able to:

Know the concept and meaning of sexual harassment at the workplace;
Illustrate forms of sexual harassment at the workplace and the extent of
their prevalence in India and elsewhere; and
Highlight various ways of addressing and responding to the same; including
through law and social action.

12.3 WHAT IS SEXUAL HARASSMENT AT THE

WORKPLACE?
Sexual harassment at the workplace includes such unwelcome sexually
determined behaviour (whether directly or by implication) as:
Physical contact and advances;
A demand or request for sexual favours;
Sexually coloured remarks;
Showing pornography;
Any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual
nature
There are two keys issues in understanding the concept of sexual harassment at
the workplace:

1) ‘Unwelcome’ lays focus on the woman’s perspective: The focus is on how

it affects a woman rather than what was the intention of the act.

2) The ‘conduct’ should be of a sexual nature: For instance, if an employer or

superior discriminates against an employee on the basis of gender, and denies
her a promotion, but there is no conduct of sexual nature, it will not amount
to sexual harassment. Thus only conduct of a sexual nature comes within
the ambit of direct sexual harassment. The illustrations below explain what
is meant by conduct of a sexual nature.
Illustrations of Sexual Harassment at the Workplace
Verbal Sexual Harassment: asking for / demanding sexual favours, making
sexual or obscene comments / jokes / proposals, singing obscene songs,
discussing / commenting on women’s personal issues such as appearance,
marriage, pregnancy etc., saying something sexually demeaning or humiliating,
unwanted phone calls
Non-verbal Sexual Harassment: staring, leering, whistling, winking, showing
pornography or sexually explicit material, indecently exposing body part,
smacking lips, blowing kisses, ‘elevator’ eyes, sending unwanted sms / mms /
emails / letters with sexual propositions / materials / conduct that makes a
woman feel uncomfortable (sitting in an obscene manner
Physical Sexual Harassment: physical contact or advances, unwanted touching,
grabbing, holding, pinching, rubbing, blocking a woman’s path or cornering
her, sexual assault, attempts to molest 143
Gender, Law and Society
12.4 FORMS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT AT THE
WORKPLACE
Quid pro quo – sexual favours as a pre-condition to employment / increment
/ promotion. This means that a woman would get benefits of being employed
or promoted or get an increment or a raise in grade or academic
acknowledgement or recommendation, only if she conceded to the
harassment. In other words, the consent to the sexual acts was not freely
given by the woman; she consented under pressure that she could lose the
rightful benefits if she did not concede to the same.

Retaliatory – refusal to provide sexual favours results in a backlash against

the employee. This could be in the form of giving low marks / failing the
student in an academic institution, or denying increment / promotion /
professional opportunities to the woman in a working environment.

Hostile working environment – workplace environment becomes sexualized

to an extent that the employee’s ability to work is affected. This is where
the perpetrator may not directly harass the woman, but he may put up a
gender insensitive poster, insist on gender insensitive computer screens,
display pornography, say lewd jokes loudly and so on, which make it
extremely uncomfortable for women to work in that environment.

Further Illustrations of Sexual Harassment at the Workplace

At an interview for determining increment and promotion, B – the immediate
supervisor of A – started posing questions to A about her sexual history and
preferences of sexual acts. It was implicit that if A did not answer these
questions, B would not recommend her for increment or promotion. She
found the line of questioning undesirable. B has committed quid pro quo
sexual harassment.

B – an employer – makes A – a female employee – stay late in the evening at

the office, on the pretext of work, long after all other workers leave the
office for the day. He would then find excuses to sit near her, and suggest
that they could go together to watch a film. A felt uncomfortable and found
the sexual advances unwelcome. So she refused to go out with B. B threatened
to dismiss her from the job if she does not go out to the movie with him. B
has committed retaliatory sexual harassment.

B – the principal of a college – calls A – a girl student – to his cabin repeatedly,

and on flimsy pretexts, to discuss studies. In his cabin, he puts up
pornographic pictures of women, which make it uncomfortable for A to even
step into the cabin. B has sexually harassed A by creating a hostile working
environment for her.
Check Your Progress Exercise 1
1) Write different forms of sexual harassment at workplace.
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................
144
 Sexual Harassment at
12.5 CAUSES AND FEATURES OF SEXUAL Workplace

HARASSMENT AT THE WORKPLACE

Sexual harassment at the workplace has been a prevailing practice for decades,
if not centuries. It became much more prevalent and visible when women stepped
out of their homes, and took up jobs in big numbers. This threatened the male
domination and monopoly in the public sphere, as in government institutions,
educational institutions, corporate offices and so on. Added to this, women have
been increasingly viewed as sexual objects, and as targets of sexual attacks in
the private and public spheres.

Sexual harassment is an act that strikes at the root of women’s right to life with
dignity, and to travel, function, live, study and work in a safe environment that is
free of sexual harassment. Though sexual harassment of women and girls is
rampant in many places such as public roads and spaces, public transport, in
workspaces in public and private offices, and in educational institutions, it is
largely normalised with statements that ‘men will be men’ and ‘women should
be careful.’Terms used in everyday discourse, such as ‘eveteasing’ and
‘chhedchaad’, aim at trivializing the harm caused to women through such acts,
and wrongly implies that the act of sexual harassment is fun and harmless from
a societal point of view.

Most women suffer from sexual harassment in silence, as there are adverse
consequences faced by women who openly speak up against the perpetrator,
who is often a male colleague or superior. Employers have often failed in taking
action against the perpetrators because they have not considered sexual harassment
to be an issue that is serious enough to warrant intervention. It is a worse state of
affairs when employers side with and shield the perpetrators, and either transfer
the complaining woman to another office, or discontinue her services, as though
she was at fault! Here are a few reasons that contribute to the silent tolerance of
sexual harassment by the concerned woman:
The power dynamics at the workplace (man-woman, employer-employee,
superior-subordinate);
A lack of confidence in the organization that action will be taken upon a
complaint;
The stigma and strong social taboo associated with sexual harassment;
The societal tendency of victim-blaming – such as saying that the harassment
must have taken place because the woman was not wearing appropriate
clothes, because she was at the wrong place at the wrong time, or was
giving the wrong signals through her body language;
Peer pressure at the workplace that the women may not get their promotions
and increments if they speak up against the perpetrators; and
the woman’s possible financial dependance on the job.

145
Gender, Law and Society
12.6 SOME COMMONLY HELD PERCEPTIONS
ABOUT SEXUAL HARASSMENT: MYTHS AND
REALITY
There are many myths and commonly held perceptions about sexual harassment
of women in the workplace. Such myths are far from reality, and serve to
undermine justice for the aggrieved woman.

Myth Reality
1. Women enjoy sexual harassment Sexual harassment is humiliating,
/ ‘eve teasing’ intimidating, painful & frightening
2. It is harmless flirtation; women Behaviour that is unwelcome to
who object have no sense of women cannot be considered harmless
humour or funny. Sexual harassment at the
workplace is defined by its impact on
the woman, not by intent of the
perpetrator.
3. Women keep quiet about it; that Women keep quiet to avoid the stigma
means they like it attached & retaliation from the
harasser, & afraid of being called liars
and blamed for the harassment
4. When women say ‘no’, they It’s a common myth held by men to
actually mean ‘yes’ justify one-sided advances & sexual
aggression; when women mean ‘no’,
they mean ‘no’!

5. Sexual harassment is natural Men are not born knowing how to

male behaviour; boys will be sexually harass others. It’s learnt
boys; a man is the hunter & the within the context of a sexist and
woman is a prey patriarchal environment that
perpetuates control over women’s
sexuality
6. Women ask for sexual This is a classic way of shifting the
harassment by being blame from the harasser to the victim.
provocatively dressed; decent Not all women who are harassed are
women do not get harassed provocatively dressed; women have a
right to dress, act & move freely
without feeling the threat of
harassment
7. If the woman ignores sexual In most cases, the sexual harassment
harassment, it will stop increases as the harasser interprets the
silence as silent enjoyment
8. Women always lie about being There is much at stake for the woman
sexually harassed once she complains about sexual
harassment. There is a stigma attached,
she is often blamed for it; she faces
hostility and harassment at the
workplace, sometimes dismissed; so
146 the possibility is minimal.
 Sexual Harassment at
12.7 SOME CASE STUDIES ON SEXUAL Workplace

HARASSMENT
K P S Gill case
RupanDeol Bajaj worked as the Special Secretary, Finance as an IAS officer.
In 1998, Rupan and her husband went to a party hosted by the then Punjab
Financial Commissioner S L Kapoor in Chandigarh, for which they had been
invited. At the party, the women invitees were seated in one semicircle and
the male invitees in another semicircle facing each other. As Rupan sat and
conversed with other women, KPS Gill – the then Director General of Police,
Punjab – went and sat at a chair with the ladies. One by one, the women left
the place due to his misbehaviour. He then called out to Rupan and asked her
to sit with him as he had something to discuss with her. When she approached
him and was about to sit, he pulled her chair close to his, so that their chairs
were touching each other. She sensed that something was not right and went
back to sit with her other women friends.

After some time, he approached the place where she was sitting, stood very
close to her, so that his legs were about 4 inches from her knees. He ordered
her to get up immediately and go with him. All the women were shocked and
speechless. Rupan objected to his behaviour and asked him to go away from
the place. When he repeated his command, Rupan tried to leave the place out
of fear, but was unable to do so as KPS Gill had blocked her way. She pulled
her chair back, and got up and turned backwards to leave the place, KPS Gill
slapped her on her posterior, in the presence of all the guests. This became a
high profile, publicized case that was talked about for many years.

Rupan informed her superiors including the Chief Secretary, Advisor to the
Governor and the Governor of Punjab. After eleven days, when this did not
result in the registration of an FIR with the police, Rupan formally lodged a
police complaint. KPS Gill used his influence and power as the then
Commissioner of Police to stall the investigation. He approached the High
Court and obtained an order quashing the complaint made against him. The
High Court had said that it was highly unlikely that KPS Gill – a well-respected
police official – would outrage Rupan’s modesty in the presence of all the
guests, and that even if he had done so, the offence was too trivial to lodge a
complaint!!!Rupan approached the Supreme Court which reversed the High
Court order, so that the investigation could be completed.3

The trial court held KPS Gill guilty of charges under S. 354 IPC (outraging
the modesty of a woman) and S. 509 IPC (word, gesture or act intended to
insult a woman). The High Court and Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s
judgment.

The trial court sentenced KPS Gill to a fine of Rs. 2,00,000 (Rupees two lakhs),
three months’ rigorous imprisonment, two months’ simple imprisonment and
three years of probation. The High Court modified the sentence by reducing
the probation period from three years to one year and keeping the sentence
suspended during this period on his undertaking of maintaining good behaviour
and not indulge in drinking in public places and parties. Since KPS Gill did
not violate terms of the undertaking and had served one year’s probation, the
147
Gender, Law and Society
Supreme Court said that the probation was assumed to have been completed
by him.4
Rupan refused to accept the fine amount, and donated it to a women’s
organization which could assist women in difficult circumstances. Rupan was
praised by the media largely because she had lodged a complaint against a
powerful and influential police officer, and refused to be threatened into silence.

Ruchika Girhotra’s case

Ruchika Girhotra was a 14 year old girl studying in Class X in Chandigarh.
She was a promising tennis player. S.P.S. Rathore was a senior police official
and the founding president of the Haryana Lawn Tennis Association. He used
the garage of his house as the Association’s office and had built a tennis court
too. In August 1990, Rathore visited Ruchika’s house and met her father S. C.
Girhotra. As the head of the Haryana Lawn Tennis Association, Rathore
promised to get special training for Ruchika. He requested that Ruchika meet
him the following day in connection with this.

The next day, Ruchika, along with her friend Aradhana Prakash, went to play
at the lawn tennis court and met Rathore in his office (in the garage of his
house). On seeing both of them, Rathore asked Aradhana to call the tennis
coach, Mr. Thomas, to his room. Aradhana left, and Rathore had created an
opportunity to be alone with Ruchika. He immediately grabbed her hand and
waist and pressed his body against hers. Ruchika tried to push him away, but
he continued molesting her. In a short while, Aradhana returned and saw what
Rathore was doing to Ruchika. On seeing Aradhana, Rathore released Ruchika
and fell back in his chair. He then asked Aradhana to go out of his room and
personally bring the coach with her. When she refused, Rathore scolded
Aradhana loudly, asking her to bring the coach. He insisted that Ruchika stayed
in his room, but she managed to run out. She later told Aradhana what Rathore
had done with her. The girls initially did not tell their parents what had
happened, but when Rathore called them to his office again, they decided to
tell their parents and seek their help.
The residents of the area, mostly parents of tennis players, decided to take the
matter up with higher authorities. Due to the pressure put by them, DGP R R
Singh conducted an inquiry, in which he found Rathore to have molested
Ruchika and recommended that an FIR be lodged against him. However, the
report, issued in September 1990, never reached the Chief Minister, as Rathore
used his influential connections in the government. Instead of filing an FIR
as recommended by the report, the government initiated departmental action,
and, a year later, in May 1991, it issued a chargesheet against Rathore. However
no further action was taken.
Meanwhile, Rathore used his influence to cause extreme harassment to Ruchika
and her family members. A few weeks after the incident, Ruchika was expelled
from her school – a school she had studied in from Class I. The school
authorities claimed that she was expelled because she had not paid the school
fees, although it was later admitted that she had been targeted and other students
in a similar situation had not been expelled. Her expulsion was used later by
Rathore’s lawyers to caste aspersions on Ruchika’s character. After being
expelled, for weeks, Ruchika stayed in her room, and was unable to travel out
148 without being heckled by Rathore’s supporters.
 Sexual Harassment at
Several false complaints of theft, murder and defamation were registered Workplace
against Ruchika, her father and brother, as well as Aradhana and her parents.
Ruchika’s brother, Ashu, was illegally detained by the police, tortured, and
severely beaten in the presence of Ruchika in order to force her to take back
her complaint. Unable to withstand the immense pressure, Ruchika consumed
poison and committed suicide in December 1993, days after her brother was
paraded in handcuffs by the police in his locality. Rathore refused to release
Ruchika’s body to her father Subash unless he signed blank sheets of paper.
The blank papers were later used by the police to establish that the family had
accepted Ruchika’s forged autopsy report. Ruchika’s father and brother soon
moved out of Chandigarh, due to the constant harassment.

Rathore filed ten civil cases against Aradhana – Ruchika’s friend and the sole
witness in the molestation case. She received abusive and threatening calls
for months until she got married and left for Australia. Pankaj Bhardwaj, the
lawyer who took up Ruchika’s case, was slapped with two court cases by
Rathore - a defamation case and a case for compensation. Rathore also filed
cases against some journalists who had reported on the case, claiming a huge
amount of damages for defamation.

In 1998, there was finally a CBI inquiry, after eight years of inaction by the
government due to Rathore’s misuse of his power and influence to threaten
and silence those who supported Ruchika. Aradhana’s parents supported and
followed up the case consistently. Rathore adopted many delaying tactics to
prolong the trial. Finally, in 2009, 19 years after the incident, Rathore was
convicted and given a sentence of six months’ imprisonment, and released on
bail a few minutes later. He was stripped off the police medal for meritorious
service awarded to him earlier by the central government.

Both Rupan’s and Ruchika’s cases have some similarity – they are both cases
of sexual harassment against influential and powerful police officials. In both
cases, the concerned molesters tried to misuse the law to scuttle justice for the
women concerned. In both cases, the act was trivialized, and the women
pursuing justice were made to seem as if they were at fault. In both cases, the
sentence given was minimal even though the consequence of the act on the
concerned women was large.

In Ruchika’s case, she was unable to handle the extreme harassment that
Rathore subjected her and her family members to, as a result of which she
committed suicide. In Rupan’s case, being an adult and an IAS officer, with
the strong support of her husband, she was more successful in her pursuit of
justice.

12.8 RESPONSE OF THE LAW

Bhanwari Devi’s case
Bhanwari Devi was a Dalit woman who worked as a ‘saathin’ – a grassroot
worker employed by the Women’s Development Project run by the government
of Rajasthan. In discharge of her responsibilities at work, she would go from
village to village, and prevent child marriages. In 1992, when she stopped a
child marriage in the village of Bhateri, the upper caste men who were in favour
of child marriages, decided to teach her a lesson and gang-raped her. While her 149
Gender, Law and Society gang rape led to a criminal trial that resulted in acquittal of accused persons,
Bhanwari Devi’s rape also became a flash point for the women’s movement to
demand protection from the employers for discharging their responsibilities at
work. A non-governmental organization by the name of Vishaka filed a public
interest litigation in the Supreme Court, seeking guidelines in this regard.

Guidelines Issued by the Supreme Court Judgment in Vishakha vs. State of

Rajasthan5

In 1997, the Supreme Court of India passed a landmark judgement observing

that sexual harassment at the workplace is a violation of a woman’s fundamental
right to pursue a trade, occupation or profession of her choice, as guaranteed by
the Indian Constitution. This is because she is deprived of a ‘safe’ working
environment. The Supreme Court also emphasized that right to life means right
to life with dignity.

The primary responsibility for ensuring such safety and dignity was through a
suitable legislation by the legislature, and the creation of a mechanism for its
enforcement. However, as a stop gap arrangement, till such a law was passed
by the legislature, the Supreme Court laid down some guidelines that should be
followed with regard to sexual harassment at the workplace in order to protect
women’s rights. The guidelines laid down employers’ responsibility for taking
due steps to prevent, prohibit and redress grievances of sexual harassment, by
establishing a Sexual Harassment Complaints Committee.
S. 354A of the Indian Penal Code
Sexual harassment was criminalized in 2013 and spelt out as a punishable offence
in S. 354A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It includes sexual offences in public
spaces (such as roads, trains, buses) as well as private spaces (such as educational
institutions and workplaces).

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and

Redressal) Act 2013

Sixteen years after the Vishaka judgement was pronounced, in 2013, The Sexual
Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal )
Act was passed. It has been enacted with the stated objective of providing
protection against sexual harassment of women at workplace and prevention
and redressal of complaints of sexual harassment and related [Link] is a
civil law that lays down measures to prevent and prohibit sexual harassment at
the workplace and to provide redress of complainants. It provides for the
establishment of complaints committees to investigate and redress grievances.
The IPC provision on sexual harassment, discussed above, complements the civil
legislation, and provides an option to women and girls to pursue remedies under
criminal or civil law or both. Both the IPC provision as well as the 2013 Act
consider woman to be the victim and man to the perpetrator. After the enactment
of the 2013 law, the Vishaka guidelines are no longer operational.

12.9 SUMMING UP
Sexual harassment does not stem from men’s inability to control sexual
desires; it stems from the need of some men to assert their power and control
150
 over women, including in educational institutions, work places and public Sexual Harassment at
Workplace
places, and to demonstrate male superiority.

There are two keys aspects of what amounts to sexual harassment at the
workplace: a) ‘unwelcome’ behaviour from the woman’s perspective and
how it affects her rather than the intention of the harasser; and b) the conduct
in question should be of a sexual nature.

Sexual harassment could be non-verbal, verbal or physical in nature;

It could be in the form of quid pro quo, retaliation or creating a hostile

working environment;

Most women who face sexual harassment at the workplace are intimidated
into silence, due to the power dynamics at the workplace, a lack of
confidence in the organization that action will be taken upon a complaint,
the stigma and strong social taboo associated with sexual harassment, the
societal tendency of victim-blaming and the woman’s financial dependence
on the job.

There are many myths and commonly held perceptions about sexual
harassment of women in the workplace. Such myths are far from reality,
and serve to undermine justice for the aggrieved woman;

In 1997, the Supreme Court issued guidelines on preventing, prohibiting

and redressing grievances related to sexual harassment at the workplace in
the landmark judgment – Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan;

In 2013, the Parliament inserted S. 354A in the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
recognizing sexual harassment as a criminal offence;

It also enacted a civil legislation - The Sexual Harassment of Women at

Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013;

The IPC provision on sexual harassment complements the civil legislation,

and provides an option to women and girls to pursue remedies under criminal
or civil law or both; and

Both the IPC provision as well as the 2013 Act consider woman to be the
victim and man to the perpetrator.

12.10 KEY WORDS

Case Studies: It a research method in which researcher documents a process of
development of a particular situation, a person or a group over a period of time.

12.11 SUGGESTED READINGS

Pratiksha Baxi, Sexual Harassment, available at [Link]
dam/india/docs/sexual_harassment.pdf

The Lawyers Collective, Women’s Rights Initiative (2004), Law Relating to

Sexual Harassment at the Workplace, New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co.
Pvt. Ltd. 151
Gender, Law and Society Tom Dannenbaum and Keya Jayaram (2005), Combatting Sexual Harassment at
the Workplace: A Handbook for Women, Employers and NGOs, Mumbai: India
Centre for Human Rights and Law

Vibhuti Patel, A Brief History of the Battle Against Sexual Harassment at the
Workplace, available at [Link]
[Link]

12.12 UNIT END QUESTIONS

1) Explain two case studies of sexual harassment on women
2) Explain different forms of sexual harassment

152