Power, Dignity and Institutional Accountability: A Thematic Legal Analysis of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013
Main Article Content
Abstract
Sexual harassment in the workplace reflects entrenched gendered power imbalances and structural inequalities that undermine women’s dignity, autonomy, and economic participation. The enactment of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 marked a significant legislative response to these concerns in India, transforming the normative framework first articulated in Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan into binding statutory obligations. This paper undertakes a qualitative thematic legal analysis of the POSH Act, examining its conceptual foundations, preventive architecture, redressal mechanisms, and structural limitations. Through doctrinal examination of statutory provisions, judicial interpretations, and scholarly commentary, the study identifies four dominant themes: (i) recognition of workplace power asymmetries; (ii) institutionalization of preventive duties; (iii) procedural justice through Internal Complaints Committees; and (iv) persistent cultural and structural barriers to enforcement. The findings indicate that while the Act establishes a comprehensive rights-based framework aligned with constitutional guarantees and international commitments, its transformative potential is constrained by inconsistent implementation, limited reach in informal sectors, and continuing socio-cultural resistance. The paper concludes by recommending institutional strengthening, inclusive reinterpretation, and structural reforms to enhance the Act’s effectiveness in combating gender exploitation in organizations.
Downloads
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011.
Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, No. 14 of 2013, India.
L. M. Finley, “Breaking women’s silence in law: The dilemma of the gendered nature of legal reasoning,” Notre Dame Law Review, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 886–910, 1989.
National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India, (2014) 5 SCC 438.
L. C. Hebert, “Sexual harassment is gender harassment,” U.K. Annual Review, vol. 12, pp. 45–60, 1995.
L. M. Finley, Breaking Women’s Silence in Law. Notre Dame Press, 1989.
A. Sarpotdar, “Sexual harassment of women: Reflections on the private sector,” Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 48, no. 23, pp. 123–130, 2013.
I. Bhardwaj, “Gender equality and equal opportunity for social economic developments,” International Journal of Law Management and Humanities, vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 112–120, 2020.
K. Gupta and E. Kurian, “POSH Act not being gender neutral,” Jus Corpus Law Journal, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 55–63, 2022.
Eera v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2017) 15 SCC 133.
Patan Jamal Vali v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2021) 16 SCC 225.
M. Gupta, “A gendered and non-inclusive statute—Protection of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013,” Nyaayshastra Law Review, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 78–92, 2022.