IN A RECENT AND WIDELY DISCUSSED RULING, the Bombay High Court held that the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) do not apply to complaints of women advocates against their men counterparts, on the ground that there exists no employer-employee relationship between advocates and Bar Councils. The judgment, delivered in UNS Women Legal Association v. Bar Council of India (2025), has ignited strong reactions from legal circles and women’s rights advocates, and for good reason.
The court’s reasoning rests on a narrow technicality: that since advocates are not employed by the Bar Council, the POSH Act cannot be triggered. But this interpretation, while legally defensible on paper, leaves a significant vacuum in protection for women in the legal profession. Women advocates are active participants in the workplace, appear in courts, work in chambers, argue cases alongside men colleagues, and yet, if they face harassment in this professional environment, they are left without the benefit of the robust and structured redressal mechanism provided under the POSH Act.
Instead, the Court directed that such grievances be addressed under the Advocates Act, 1961, particularly Section 35, which allows for disciplinary action in cases of professional misconduct. However, this mechanism, while important, is not a substitute for the POSH Act. The latter was enacted specifically to address the sensitive nature of sexual harassment, offering a time-bound, specialised, victim-sensitive mechanism, including provisions for interim relief, ICC-led inquiries, and non-retaliation safeguards, elements the Advocates Act does not prioritise.
