Cart is empty 
Facts of the Case:
Several writ petitions were filed before the Kerala High Court regarding the inaction of the State Government on the Justice Hema Committee Report, which was submitted on December 31, 2019. The report addressed various issues faced by women in the workplace, particularly in the Malayalam film industry. Despite the importance of the report, it lay dormant for over four years, prompting litigation to ensure that the recommendations were acted upon.
The Justice Hema Committee was tasked with investigating allegations of sexual harassment and gender-based issues faced by women in the film industry. Although the report was submitted in 2019, no significant action was taken by the State Government until August 2024, when an order was passed to form a Special Investigation Team (SIT) in response to complaints received after the partial publication of the report.
Contentions of the Parties:
Petitioners’ Contention: The petitioners argued that the Justice Hema Committee Report should have prompted immediate and decisive action from the State Government. They expressed concern over the prolonged delay in addressing the serious issues raised in the report, which highlighted systemic problems faced by women in the workplace.
State Government’s Contention: The Advocate General representing the State Government acknowledged that no action had been taken on the report since its submission. The Government stated that a copy of the report was handed over to the Director General of Police in February 2021, but no further steps were taken until August 2024, when an SIT was constituted to investigate complaints related to the report.
Court’s Observations:
The Kerala High Court expressed perplexity and concern over the State Government’s inaction in addressing the findings of the Justice Hema Committee. The Court pointed out that Kerala has a higher literacy rate and life expectancy for women compared to the national average, making it imperative for the Government to address issues affecting women. The Court emphasized that women’s rights should not be treated as a minority issue, as women make up a significant portion of the population.
The Court criticized the State Executive’s “alarming lethargy,” noting that despite the high-profile nature of the Justice Hema Committee, which was chaired by a retired High Court judge, the Government failed to take even the minimal step of deciding whether it agreed with the report’s findings. The inaction persisted for years, leading to the present litigation.
Additionally, the Court highlighted the importance of taking action under the Directive Principles of State Policy outlined in the Indian Constitution, which obliges the State to apply these principles when making laws. The Court observed that silence and inaction were no longer options available to the Government, and urgent measures were required to address the issues faced by women, particularly in their vocations.
Court’s Directions:
- The Court directed the State Government to immediately provide the full Justice Hema Committee Report, along with its annexures, to the SIT formed on August 25, 2024. The SIT was tasked with reviewing the report to determine whether any cognizable offenses had been committed and to take suitable action in accordance with the law.
- The SIT was instructed to conduct its investigation with sensitivity, respecting the privacy rights of both the victims and those accused. The investigation should be fair to all parties involved, and a preliminary inquiry should be completed promptly.
- The SIT was required to submit an action-taken report to the State Government within two weeks. The State was then directed to submit this report as part of its response to the ongoing writ petitions.
- The Court advised the SIT members to refrain from holding press conferences or communicating with the media about the investigation. It also urged the media to exercise restraint when reporting on the case, respecting the privacy rights of both victims and the accused.
- The High Court indicated that it would continue to monitor the progress of the SIT’s investigation and expressed hope that the media would avoid applying undue pressure on the investigating team.
Controversial Observation Regarding the POSH Act:
In a significant observation, the Court remarked that the POSH Act does not cover cases of women seeking jobs, urging the Government to consider framing laws with a more feminist perspective. However, this statement directly contradicts the existing legal framework under the POSH Act, as defined under Section 2(a), which includes women seeking employment within the definition of an “aggrieved woman.”
According to the POSH Act, an “aggrieved woman” includes not only women already employed but also women “whether employed or not” who allege sexual harassment by a respondent in relation to the workplace. This broad definition explicitly covers women seeking jobs, ensuring their right to protection from sexual harassment during the recruitment process and beyond.
Conclusion:
The Kerala High Court’s sharp rebuke of the State Government’s inaction highlights the importance of taking timely action to protect the rights of women. However, the Court’s comment on the scope of the POSH Act has raised questions, as the existing legal framework already provides protection to women seeking jobs, contrary to the Court’s assertion.
