BINU TAMTA Vs. HIGH COURT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition Was Filed By Two Learned Advocates Of This Court, Ms Binu Tamta And Ms Vibha Datta Makhija, For Certain Reliefs On The Basis Of A Newspaper Report, Which Had Reported About An Incident Which Occurred In The Delhi High Court, Alleging That An Employee Of The High Court Had Been Filming Lady Advocates In The Chamber Toilet.

(2.) The Filing Of The Writ Petition Led To The Question Of The Formation Of A Committee As Suggested By This Court In Vishaka V. State Of Rajasthan, 1997 6 SCC 241. This Led To The Further Suggestion That Proper Regulations Be Framed In Regard To Gender Sensitisation And To Prevent Sexual Harassment Of Women At The Supreme Court Of India And In Other Courts As Well. In Our Order Dated 23-4-2013, We Had Constituted A Sub-Committee With Mr Fali S. Nariman, Learned Senior Advocate, As The Chairperson Thereof, To Look Into The Reports Submitted By Ms Asha Menon In Her Capacity As Member-Secretary Of The National Legal Services Authority And Also To Look Into The Draft Rules Prepared By Ms Vibha Datta Makhija And, Thereafter, To Submit A Comprehensive Set Of Draft Rules On The Basis Of Which Orders Could Be Passed.

(3.) Such A Report Was Submitted3 Before Us In Its Draft Form And After Thorough Discussion, The Committee Was Requested To Make Certain Additions And Alterations And Now Finally The Regulations Referred To As, The "Gender Sensitisation And Sexual Harassment Of Women At The Supreme Court Of India (Prevention, Prohibition And Redressal) Regulations, 2013", Have Been Placed Before Us In Its Final Form. The Said Regulations Have Also Been Considered By The Learned Attorney General, As Also The Learned Additional Solicitor General, Mr Sidharth Luthra. All The Learned Counsel Are Agreeable That The Regulations, In Their Present Form, May Be Accepted And Appropriate Orders May Be Passed Thereupon.