Delhi HC Quashes To Entertain PIL Seeking Survey On Sexual Harassment In Film Industry

The Delhi High Court on Thursday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation that sought a survey on sexual harassment in the Indian film industry, ruling that the petition was based on speculation without concrete evidence or specific complaints.

The petitioner had also requested the implementation of the Justice K Hema Committee’s findings, particularly regarding the applicability of the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) Act in the film industry.

A bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela pointed out that the petition lacked empirical data and failed to present any particular instances of sexual harassment where remedies were unavailable.

The bench noted that the Justice K Hema Committee had already reviewed complaints and taken appropriate action, addressing concerns within the industry.

The court also emphasized that it would not entertain a “roving and fishing inquiry,” stating that while PILs can be filed, they must be based on factual evidence, not assumptions.

“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. Given these circumstances, we do not consider it appropriate to accede to the prayer made by the petitioner,” the court ruled, effectively closing the petition.

The petitioner, Ajeesh Kalathil Gopi, a practicing advocate, had requested the court to direct the National Commission for Women (NCW) to submit a comprehensive study on sexual harassment in the film industry. He also sought legislative reforms to address gender-based discrimination and improve the implementation of robust measures to tackle harassment on a national scale.

The petition referenced the Justice Hema Committee report, which found that certain definitions under the POSH Act, 2013, did not fully capture the unique nature of the film industry.

For example, the term “aggrieved woman” in Section 2(a) was considered too narrow, as it did not account for the transient, freelance, and often informal nature of employment in the film industry, where workers are typically not employed in a permanent capacity.

Despite the petition’s concerns, the Delhi High Court found no need for further investigation or changes, as the existing framework had already been addressed by the Justice K Hema Committee.

The court’s ruling highlights the importance of concrete evidence and practical solutions when filing PILs, especially in cases involving complex issues like sexual harassment.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International