Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in 21. The Hon'ble Supreme Court Apparel Export Promotion in Apparel Export Promotion Council Vs. A. K. Chopra (1991) 1 Council Vs. A. K. Chopra SCC 759 was confronted with the (1991) 1 SCC 759 was question as to whether an action confronted with the question as of the superior against a female to whether an action of the employee, which is against moral superior against a female sanctions and does not withstand employee, which is against test of decency and modesty not moral sanctions and does not amount to sexual harassment? Is withstand test of decency and physical contact with the female modesty not amount to sexual employee an essential ingredient harassment? Is physical of such a charge? Does the contact with the female allegation that the superior tried employee an essential to molest a female employee at ingredient of such a charge? the place of work, not constitute Does the allegation that the an act unbecoming of good superior tried to molest a conduct and behavior expected female employee at the place of from the superior? work, not constitute an act unbecoming of good conduct It was held by the Supreme Court and behavior expected from the superior?

credibility. In the instant case, the High Court to the effect that behaviour of respondent did not since the respondent did not cease to be outrageous for want of actually molest Miss X but only an actual assault or touch by the tried to molest her and, superior officer. In a case therefore, his removal from involving charge of sexual service was not warranted harassment or attempt to sexually rebel against realism and lose molest, the courts are required to their sanctity and credibility. In examine the broader probabilities the instant case, the behaviour of a case and not get swayed by of respondent did not cease to insignificant discrepancies or be outrageous for want of an narrow technicalities or dictionary actual assault or touch by the meaning of the expression superior officer. In a case molestation. They must examine involving charge of sexual the entire material to determine harassment or attempt to the genuineness of the complaint. sexually molest, the courts are The statement of the victim must required to examine the be appreciated in the background broader probabilities of a case of the entire case. Where the and not get swayed by evidence of the victim inspires insignificant discrepancies or OA-2167/2017 confidence, as is the position in narrow technicalities or the instant case, the courts are dictionary meaning of the obliged to rely on it. Such cases expression molestation. They are required to be dealt with great must examine the entire sensitivity. Sympathy in such material to determine the cases in favour of the superior genuineness of the complaint. officer is wholly misplaced and The statement of the victim mercy has no relevance. The High must be appreciated in the Court overlooked the ground background of the entire case. realities and ignored the fact that Where the evidence of the the conduct of the respondent victim inspires confidence, as is against his junior female the position in the instant case, employee, Miss X, was wholly the courts are obliged to rely against moral sanctions, decency on it. Such cases are required to and was offensive to her modesty. be dealt with great sensitivity. Reduction of punishment in a case Sympathy in such cases in like this is bound to have favour of the superior officer is demoralizing effect on the women wholly misplaced and mercy employees and is a retrograde has no relevance. The High step. There was no justification Court overlooked the ground for25. the High Court to interfere realities and ignored the fact with the punishment imposed by that the conduct of the the departmental authorities. The respondent against his junior act of the respondent was female employee, Miss X, was unbecoming of good conduct and wholly against moral sanctions, behaviour expected from a decency and was offensive to superior officer and undoubtedly her modesty. Reduction of amounted to sexual harassment of punishment in a case like this is Miss X. bound to have demoralizing effect on the women employees and is a retrograde step. There was no justification for the High Court to interfere with the punishment imposed by the departmental authorities.