Click the Play button to listen to article

The Supreme Court on Friday urged the Union Government and the Bar Council of India (BCI) to jointly draft regulations for addressing sexual harassment complaints by women lawyers practising before High Courts, district courts, Taluka courts, tribunals and other quasi-judicial authorities.

A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Augustine George Masih observed that the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) could not be applied in a “straitjacket manner” to women in the legal profession and asked the parties to study the Supreme Court's own 2013 regulations and formulate a similar framework for other courts.

“These regulations have been made with regard to the Supreme Court of India precincts only. In order to have a wider coverage of these regulations in so far as the High Courts and all courts under the District Judiciary as well as Tribunals of the Central and State Governments, other quasi-judicial authorities etc., it is necessary that a separate set of regulations are made as we find that the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 cannot be applied in a straitjacket manner to the aggrieved women who belong to the legal profession. In the circumstances, we request the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties to have a joint consultation so as to draft a set of regulations applicable to all the aforesaid judicial and quasi-judicial courts, tribunals and authorities.”

The Court also directed the BCI to ascertain whether any such regulations were already being implemented by the State Bar Councils.

“Learned counsel for the respondent Bar Council also submitted that she would seek instructions in the matter and endeavour to bring about a common regulation applicable to the aggrieved women who are in the legal profession. We also request the learned counsel for the Bar Council of India to ascertain from the Bar Councils of the states as to whether any extant regulations are being implemented in this regard”, the Court ordered.

The Court noted the Gender Sensitization and Sexual Harassment of Women at the Supreme Court of India (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Regulations, 2013 are specifically framed for the Supreme Court precincts and provide a mechanism applicable to women advocates.

Justice Nagarathna observed that a similar framework could be framed for High Courts, district courts and Taluka courts.

“So, now, for the High Court, you can have this. Maybe you can replicate it. Instead of saying Supreme Court, you can say High Court. What about district court, Taluk court? They also should be directed,” she said.

Justice Nagarathna said that the proposed regulations would have to define the workplace and could not simply copy the POSH Act. She also said that tribunals, quasi-judicial authorities and other bodies established under Central and State laws would have to be considered.

The Court was hearing a PIL seeking declaration that the protections under the POSH Act, 2013 extend to women advocates who are registered with State Bar Councils and practicing before courts. The petition also seeks directions to Bar Councils and Bar Associations to constitute Internal Committees to hear the complaints of women advocates.

The petition was filed after the Bombay High Court held that the POSH Act applied to employees of Bar Councils and Bar Associations but not women advocates, as there was no employer-employee relationship between them.

During the hearing today, Senior Advocate Mahalakshmi Pavani for the petitioner submitted that the Supreme Court in Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India directed Bar Councils and Bar Associations to create mechanisms for dealing with sexual harassment complaints by women advocates.

Pavani also submitted that Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961, which deals with professional misconduct, could not replace the mechanism contemplated under the POSH Act.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati for the Union submitted that the Advocates Act was broad enough to address the issue.

Justice Nagarathna noted that there was no employer-employee relationship between a senior and junior advocate and remarked that the existing POSH mechanisms for court employees could not by themselves address the issue concerning advocates.

She asked the parties to consider how the Supreme Court regulations could be replicated for advocates across the country, highlighting that the regulations were applicable to advocates.

“Try to come out with this in mind, because this is now working quite well for Supreme Court. You look at it it for all the Supreme Court of India precincts, and accordingly, you will have to make it as High Court of each state precinct. And court-wise, you will have to just replicate this. Come up with another set of regulations. And they can be implemented by all the bar councils”, she said.

Advocate Radhika Gautam for BCI said that she would seek instructions and endeavour to bring about a common regulation applicable to the aggrieved women who are in the legal profession. She sought time to obtain information from all State Bar Councils about existing regulations dealing with sexual harassment complaints by women advocates.

The Court listed the matter on 25th November.

Case no. – W.P. (C) No. 805 of 2025

Case Title – Seema Joshi v. Bar Council of India and Ors.

Tags: