|
The Delhi High Court on Thursday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a survey on sexual harassment across the Indian film industry, noting that the petition was based on speculation without any empirical data or specific complaints.
The petitioner had also requested that the findings of the Justice K Hema Committee be implemented more effectively, particularly regarding the applicability of the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) Act in the film industry. The bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that the petition did not present any concrete complaints of sexual harassment for which remedies were unavailable and that the Justice K Hema Committee had already addressed concerns by reviewing complaints and taking appropriate actions. The court further stated that it would not entertain a "roving and fishing inquiry" and stated that while a PIL could be filed, it must be based on factual evidence rather than presumptions. "The entire plea is based on surmises without any empirical data. In so far as the K. Hema Committee report is concerned, complaints have already been filed, and some action has been taken. In the given circumstances, we do not consider it appropriate to accede to the prayer made by the petitioner," the court said, closing the petition. The petitioner Ajeesh Kalathil Gopi, a practising Advocate through a plea prayed from the Court to direct the National Commission for Women (NCW) to submit a comprehensive study report to this Court and the Union of India, focusing on the need for legislative reforms to effectively address and eradicate sexual harassment and gender-based discrimination within the Indian film industry, ensuring the implementation of robust measures on a national scale. Based on the Justice Hema Committee Report, it has been found that certain definitions under the Prevention of Sexual Harassment Act, 2013 (POSH Act) do not fully address the unique characteristics of the film industry. For example, the term "aggrieved woman" under Section 2(a) of the Act is too narrow and fails to encompass the transient, freelance, and often informal nature of employment within the film industry, plea added. (ANI)
|
