<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the Centre on a plea for the implementation of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) (POSH) Act, 2013 for women lawyers enrolled with State Bar Councils or Bar Association.</p><p>A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan also sought a response from the Bar Council of India.</p>.SC irked over 21 adjournments in bail matter, asks Allahabad HC Chief Justice to ensure hearing.<p>The court, however, declined to consider a plea by petitioner- advocate Seema Joshi, challenging the validity of a Bombay High Court's judgement of July 7, 2025, limiting the implementation of the POSH Act to employees of Bar Councils and Bar Associations.</p><p>During the hearing, the bench asked how could a petition under Article 32 (right to move court for protection of fundamental rights) of the Constitution be filed against a high court judgment.</p><p>"Either you file a PIL under Article 32 of the Constitution or you challenge the Bombay High Court order as an SLP. You cannot file a writ petition challenging the High Court order," the bench told the petitioner's counsel who agreed not to press the prayer.</p><p>The plea sought directions to Bar Councils and Bar Associations to constitute Internal Committees to hear the complaints of women advocates.</p><p>It urged the Supreme Court to ensure a purposive application of POSH to women advocates.</p><p>The plea referred to Section 2(a) of the Act, which defined an “aggrieved woman” as one “whether employed or not”, and Section 3, which prohibited sexual harassment against “any woman” at the workplace.</p><p>The petition also relied on Section 2(o)(i) to contend that courts, Bar Council offices and Bar Associations are “institutions” or “establishments” and fall under the ambit of “workplace” within the POSH Act.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the Centre on a plea for the implementation of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) (POSH) Act, 2013 for women lawyers enrolled with State Bar Councils or Bar Association.</p><p>A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan also sought a response from the Bar Council of India.</p>.SC irked over 21 adjournments in bail matter, asks Allahabad HC Chief Justice to ensure hearing.<p>The court, however, declined to consider a plea by petitioner- advocate Seema Joshi, challenging the validity of a Bombay High Court's judgement of July 7, 2025, limiting the implementation of the POSH Act to employees of Bar Councils and Bar Associations.</p><p>During the hearing, the bench asked how could a petition under Article 32 (right to move court for protection of fundamental rights) of the Constitution be filed against a high court judgment.</p><p>"Either you file a PIL under Article 32 of the Constitution or you challenge the Bombay High Court order as an SLP. You cannot file a writ petition challenging the High Court order," the bench told the petitioner's counsel who agreed not to press the prayer.</p><p>The plea sought directions to Bar Councils and Bar Associations to constitute Internal Committees to hear the complaints of women advocates.</p><p>It urged the Supreme Court to ensure a purposive application of POSH to women advocates.</p><p>The plea referred to Section 2(a) of the Act, which defined an “aggrieved woman” as one “whether employed or not”, and Section 3, which prohibited sexual harassment against “any woman” at the workplace.</p><p>The petition also relied on Section 2(o)(i) to contend that courts, Bar Council offices and Bar Associations are “institutions” or “establishments” and fall under the ambit of “workplace” within the POSH Act.</p>
