The Delhi High Court on Thursday dismissed a PIL that sought a survey on sexual harassment within the Indian film industry.
The petition was rejected for being based on speculation, lacking empirical data or specific complaints.
The petitioner, Ajeesh Kalathil Gopi, a practicing advocate, had 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. He also sought a comprehensive study report from the National Commission for Women on the issue of sexual harassment and gender-based discrimination in the industry.
Additionally, Gopi called for legislative reforms to ensure the enforcement of stronger measures to address these concerns on a national scale.
However, the bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela noted that the petition lacked concrete evidence or any specific complaints of sexual harassment that had not been addressed.
The court pointed out that the Justice K. Hema Committee had already investigated complaints and taken appropriate action. It emphasized that the petition was based on assumptions rather than facts and could not be entertained.
“The entire plea is based on surmises without any empirical data. As for the K. Hema Committee report, 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 stated, ultimately closing the petition.
The PIL highlighted concerns raised in the Justice Hema Committee Report, which found that some aspects of the POSH Act did not adequately address the unique challenges faced by the film industry.
Specifically, it pointed out that the definition of “aggrieved woman” under Section 2(a) of the POSH Act was too narrow and did not account for the transient, freelance, and often informal nature of employment in the film industry.
The court’s dismissal of the petition reinforces the need for any public interest litigation to be based on factual evidence rather than general assumptions. It also underscores the importance of concrete data and actionable complaints in addressing legal concerns, especially in cases involving sexual harassment and gender discrimination.
