[BREAKING] POSH Act: Plea in Supreme Court against Bombay High Court judgment on guidelines to protect identities of parties

A petition has been filed before the Supreme Court challenging an order of the Bombay High Court which laid down a slew of guidelines to protect identities of the parties in proceedings under the Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) and Rules..The order under challenge was passed on September 24, 2021 by Justice GS Patel, who among other things imposed a bar on parties and lawyers from disclosing to the media the contents of any order, judgment or filing to the media or publishing any such material in any mode or fashion by any means, including social media, without specific leave of the court.The single-judge had noted that there were no established guidelines governing the field, and therefore, proceeded to set out a working protocol to govern hearings and case file management to protect the identity of parties even from accidental disclosure in proceedings under the Act..The Special Leave Petition against the same before the top court has been filed by advocate Abha Singh, who represented the original plaintiff in the case..The plea has contended that the order violates freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a), which is the cornerstone of the Constitution of India.“The High Court has failed to take into consideration that the intention of the Constitutional framers was that a well-informed citizenry would govern itself better,” stated the plea..The petition drew attention to the importance of public discourse in shaping the nature of legal entitlements delivered to women in matters of social justice and women empowerment.It also cautioned that such an order may have a “ripple effect” of deterring survivors from approaching Court as well as setting a dangerous precedent for trial cases.“The same will legitimise undue protection to sexual offenders in gross violation of principles of open court, natural justice and fundamental rights of survivors,” it was submitted..It also contended that the guidelines are violative of principles of open court enshrined in the judgment of Swapnil Tripathi vs. Supreme Court of India.It was further submitted that the original suit was filed for seeking compensation for wrongful and stigmatic termination and not in challenge of the Internal Complaints Committee’s finding which were, in fact, challenged before the appropriate fora..On these grounds, the petitioner sought an interim order staying the effect and operation of the Bombay High Court’s order..Shortly after the guidelines were laid down, several organisations and activists had also written to Bombay High Court Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Gautam Patel seeking withdrawal of the guidelines.“The Order will not only silence women but will also have a chilling effect on the media and society at large in speaking up against perpetrators of sexual violence and harassment,” read the representation urging the Court to reconsider the guidelines.The letter also expressed surprise at the guidelines, particularly since they came at a time when powerful men still stifle women’s voices through gag orders.“The order of the Court will invariably strengthen the hands of large corporates and their powerful men to protect dominant perpetrators of sexual harassment from scrutiny and legitimate public comment.”