The Calcutta High Court has ruled that terms like “baby” or “sweety” do not always amount to sexual harassment. The court observed that such expressions may be common in certain social groups and should not automatically be seen as sexually offensive.
Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya made the observations while hearing a writ petition filed by a woman officer of the Indian Coast Guard who accused her senior officer of sexual harassment. The complaint was initially dismissed by the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) after hearing both parties.
The petitioner alleged that her commanding officer repeatedly stared at her, tried to peep into her room, and called her “baby” and “sweety”. However, the court noted that after she expressed her discomfort via WhatsApp and otherwise, the officer stopped using those terms. The bench pointed out that “staring” has many shades and does not always mean sexual harassment under the 2013 Act.
The court also highlighted the need to avoid reverse bias against male accused in harassment cases. It stressed that while laws rightly protect women, excessive misuse could harm workplace equality:
“If adjudicating forums extend a double layer of protection beyond what the statute provides, it may create more barriers for competent women in employment instead of removing them.”
The court further noted that the petitioner herself had a history of misconduct, including denial to sail, misbehavior with seniors, and making inappropriate remarks. Records also suggested psychological issues, with the court stating that her conduct appeared to show elements of misandry.
Considering these factors, the High Court upheld the ICC’s decision to absolve the respondent of sexual harassment charges.
Cause Title: XXX v. Gender Sensitization and Internal Complaint Committee & Ors.
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
