Supreme Court seeks response from Centre, BCI on plea for safety of women lawyers in police stations

The Supreme Court on May 27 sought responses from the Central government, State governments and the Bar Council of India (BCI) on a petition seeking comprehensive safeguards for women advocates visiting police stations in the course of their professional duties [Geeta Jain Aggarwal v. Union of India & Ors.]. .A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued notice on the plea. .The petition contends that women advocates who are frequently required to visit police stations to represent clients were increasingly exposed to risks of harassment, intimidation and abuse in the absence of any specific legal framework governing their safety within such State-controlled spaces.The petition refers to recent incidents reported from Noida and Karnataka involving allegations of assault, intimidation and sexual misconduct by police personnel against women advocates. It argues that such incidents were not isolated aberrations but reflected a “systemic failure” to ensure a safe working environment for women professionals operating within coercive State spaces..The petition states that the absence of safeguards creates a chilling effect on the ability of women advocates to discharge their professional duties and effectively deters them from entering police stations, especially during odd hours.It argues that this directly affects women's right to practice the legal profession under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, while also violating their rights under Articles 14 (right to equality) and 21 (right to life)..Among the safeguards proposed in the petition are: Mandatory presence of women police officers during interactions with women advocates at odd hours; Compulsory CCTV coverage with audio recording inside police stations; Maintenance of digital entry and monitoring systems; Constitution of independent complaint redressal mechanisms; Appointment of nodal officers for advocates’ safety, and Formulation of a uniform Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) governing police interaction with advocates..The petition also seeks periodic gender sensitisation programmes for police personnel and protection against retaliatory action against advocates raising complaints of police misconduct..The petition further argues that police stations, being spaces under government control and possessing coercive authority, impose a heightened duty upon the State to ensure that no woman professional was subjected to harassment, abuse or indignity.Drawing a parallel with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (in which case the Court issued guidelines to prevent sexual harassment at workplaces until a law was enacted on this issue), the plea contends that the present case discloses a similar “legislative vacuum” warranting judicial intervention..The petition has been filed through Advocate Pravir Chowdhury.