Supreme Court Orders Review of Sexual Harassment Committees in Courts Across India

The Supreme Court has taken a significant step toward strengthening workplace safety within the judicial system by directing all High Courts to submit reports on the status of sexual harassment committees in courts. The directive covers courts, tribunals and Bar associations across the country and seeks to ensure that institutional mechanisms mandated under the Vishaka guidelines are actually in place and functioning.

During the hearing, the Supreme Court made it clear that compliance with sexual harassment safeguards cannot remain on paper. The court asked High Courts to inform it whether Internal Complaints Committees and similar bodies have been constituted as required and whether they are operational.

This move signals a systemic push to bring accountability and uniformity to how complaints of sexual harassment are handled in the judicial ecosystem.

What the Supreme Court directed

The Supreme Court asked every High Court to provide a detailed status report on the constitution and functioning of sexual harassment committees in courts. This includes committees in:

• District courts

• High Courts

• Tribunals

• Bar associations attached to courts

The direction was issued in the context of ensuring compliance with the Vishaka guidelines and the later statutory framework on prevention of sexual harassment at the workplace.

The court’s focus was not on a single institution but on the entire justice delivery system. By calling for reports from all High Courts, the Supreme Court signaled that no court or tribunal is outside the scope of this review.

Why Vishaka guidelines still matter

The Vishaka guidelines were laid down by the Supreme Court in 1997 in response to a case involving the sexual harassment of a social worker. These guidelines created a legal framework for addressing sexual harassment at the workplace at a time when no specific legislation existed.

They required every employer and institution to set up a complaints committee headed by a woman, with external members and defined procedures for inquiry.

Even after Parliament enacted the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act in 2013, the core idea behind Vishaka continues to guide how sexual harassment committees in courts and other workplaces should function.

The Supreme Court’s latest direction draws directly from this framework and its insistence on institutional mechanisms rather than ad hoc responses.

Why courts and tribunals are being reviewed

Courts and tribunals are workplaces like any other. Judges, lawyers, clerks, stenographers, litigants and staff interact daily in professional settings.

Over the years, concerns have been raised about the absence or ineffectiveness of sexual harassment committees in courts. Some courts and Bar associations have been accused of not having properly constituted committees or of failing to make them accessible.

The Supreme Court’s intervention reflects the view that the judiciary must lead by example in enforcing workplace protections.

The directive acknowledges that without formal and functional committees, complaints of harassment can go unheard or unresolved.

What High Courts are expected to report

The High Courts have been asked to compile and submit information on several aspects of their internal frameworks.

These include:

• Whether sexual harassment committees have been constituted

• Whether they meet the legal and Vishaka requirements

• Whether they are active and accessible

• Whether staff and lawyers are aware of them

The focus is not merely on the existence of committees but on whether they are actually working as intended.

By seeking this information, the Supreme Court aims to map the real situation of sexual harassment committees in courts across India.

The link between judicial administration and gender justice

The case sits at the intersection of judicial administration and gender justice. Judicial administration deals with how courts are run, staffed and governed. Gender justice involves ensuring fairness and safety for women within those systems.

Sexual harassment is a workplace issue that directly affects the dignity and safety of women in the legal system. By demanding reports on sexual harassment committees in courts, the Supreme Court has brought these two areas together.

The directive suggests that ensuring safe workplaces is part of the core responsibility of the judiciary.

How Bar associations fit into the picture

The Supreme Court’s order is not limited to courts and tribunals. It also extends to Bar associations, which are professional bodies of lawyers.

Bar associations often operate within court premises and have their own offices, events and administrative structures. They are therefore also required to have sexual harassment committees in courts as part of their institutional setup.

Including Bar associations in the reporting requirement recognizes that lawyers and staff face risks not only in courtrooms but also in professional spaces controlled by these bodies.

A system wide approach rather than isolated fixes

One of the striking aspects of the Supreme Court’s direction is its scope. Instead of addressing a single complaint or a single court, the bench opted for a system wide review.

By asking all High Courts to submit reports, the court has chosen a comprehensive approach to sexual harassment committees in courts.

This allows the court to:

• Identify gaps across states and institutions

• Compare practices

• Push for uniform compliance

The aim appears to be to move away from reactive handling of individual complaints to proactive institutional reform.

What this says about accountability in the judiciary

The judiciary often deals with cases of sexual harassment in other workplaces. This order reflects an acknowledgment that it must hold itself to the same standards.

By calling for reports, the Supreme Court is asking the judicial system to account for its own compliance with the law on workplace safety.

The directive sends a message that courts and tribunals are not exempt from scrutiny when it comes to sexual harassment committees in courts.

How the reporting process will work

While the Supreme Court has asked for reports, the task of gathering information falls on the High Courts.

Each High Court oversees the district judiciary and tribunals within its jurisdiction. They will have to collect data from:

• District courts

• Family courts

• Labour courts

• Tribunals and special courts

• Bar associations attached to these courts

The compiled reports will then be sent to the Supreme Court for review.

This process is expected to reveal how widely and effectively sexual harassment committees in courts have been implemented.

Why this development has drawn attention

The legal system is often seen as a place where rights are enforced but less often examined as a workplace.

The Supreme Court’s move has drawn attention because it places the spotlight on the lived reality of women working in and around courts.

The directive recognizes that access to justice is linked not only to legal rules but also to the safety and dignity of those who make the system function.

By focusing on sexual harassment committees in courts, the court has highlighted a foundational issue of institutional trust.

What happens after the reports are submitted

Once the reports are received, the Supreme Court is expected to review them to assess compliance and identify shortcomings.

Depending on what emerges, the court may issue further directions to ensure that:

• Committees are properly constituted

• Members are trained

• Procedures are in place

• Awareness is increased

The immediate goal is to ensure that every court and Bar association has a working mechanism to deal with complaints of sexual harassment.

Why this step matters for the judicial system

The presence of functioning sexual harassment committees in courts is not just a legal formality. It is central to building a workplace where women feel safe to work, speak up and seek redress.

By asking High Courts to report, the Supreme Court has put the spotlight on a part of judicial administration that is often overlooked but deeply important.

The move suggests that the judiciary is willing to examine itself with the same seriousness that it applies to others.

A renewed focus on institutional responsibility

The Supreme Court’s directive revives the spirit of the Vishaka guidelines in a contemporary setting.

It reminds every court and Bar association that preventing and addressing sexual harassment is not optional. It is an institutional duty.

The coming weeks will show how different parts of the judicial system respond to this call for accountability.

For now, the message from the Supreme Court is clear. Sexual harassment committees in courts must exist, must function and must protect those who rely on them.