A. INTRODUCTION 

However, in addition to embracing this trend, our country—even amidst the lockdown—has also witnessed an unfortunate rise in the cases of violence and harassment against women.[2] One such type is related to harassment of women at the workplace. Prior to the lockdown, and even in it’s a procession to some degree, women’s rights were safeguarded by the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 [POSH Act hereinafter]. However, witnessing this shift in the trend of a workplace incorporate big houses and its acceptance thereof also forces us to ponder upon the possibility of harassment in these new circumstances and, if the efficacy of this legislation would suffice to combat said harassment thereunder. 
Ergo, the following article will conduct a thorough scrutiny of a small group of provisions within the POSH Act to draw emphasis upon various possible solutions apropos to the work from home culture and the global pandemic, while also keeping in mind the interests of all genders.

B. WORK FROM HOME CULTURE & NEED TO ADDRESS ITS UNDERLYING ISSUES

Changing the work environment also necessitates training of the employees of an enterprise which is requisite to said environment. In this respect, the POSH Act comprises, in addition to the local government’s responsibility for communicating, educating, training, and making women aware of this act,[4] the duty of an employer to conduct workshops for sensitizing their employees of this act.[5] However, even after the existence of these provisions, the cases of harassment of women at the workplace are a long way from a stop. It was pointed out in Medha Kotwal Lele and Ors. vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.[6] that even after the inception of Vishaka Guidelines—the predecessor for POSH Act—female employees weren’t made fully aware of their rights & remedies lying within the act, and as a result, faced harassment at the workplace.[7] As is the case with the POSH Act.[8] In addition to this notable fallacy, the continuance in the culture of work from home, coupled with the harassment of women at their extended workplace—without any knowledge as to the existence of proper remedies—would result in a misadventure for female employees.
It appears, prima facie, that the Indian Judiciary is fully conscious about the need to protect the interest of women; as evident from the decision of extension in the definition of the workplace.[9] But what lacks herein, and often neglected, is the proper enforcement and implementation of the provisions of this act.[10] Perhaps it has been rightly contended that “Indian women do not suffer from legal disparities but they suffer from practical disparities”[11] Therefore, in the wake of a global pandemic and acceptance of the work from home culture, enforcement of these provisions are the need of the hour because one could hardly imagine the horrors of reasoning otherwise. 

I. Appropriate Measures by the Employer 

Employers have to reconsider and strictly implement their anti-sexual harassment policy. Inclusion of “work from home” in the wider contextual definition of a workplace could be a healthy start. Lockdown or no lockdown, if an employer’s enterprise partakes in the culture of work from home, the inclusion and recognition of a women’s house, or for that matter, any other place she works from, should be taken into due consideration. In this regard, the Delhi High Court observed that the following factors would have bearing on determining whether the act has occurred in the ‘workplace’: 
I. Proximity from the place of work;
II. Control of the management over such a place/residence where the working woman is residing; and
III. Such a residence has to be an extension or contiguous part of the working place.[12] 

a. Acknowledgement of Extension in Workplace

b. Redefining what constitutes sexual harassment 

c. The Outlook of an employer 

d. Training Sessions

a. Recording any salacious call from the preparator;

b. Screenshots of lascivious texts;

c. Storing this information on a secure drive;

d. Sending the same details to a trustable witness, IC member, or LC Member, as the case may be; and

e. Immediately record the dates, times and facts of the incident(s).

Employers need to genuinely be concerned with the safety of women at the workplace rather than staging a farce of compliance under the POSH Act. Furthermore, in research conducted, it was suggested that if the surroundings help the situation to occur, it automatically occurs, for example, if a person is responsible for sexually threatening one time, he will do it again if the system allows him to do so.[17] However, this behaviour could easily be prevented by strict enforcement of the guidelines and following the POSH Act to the word, not only in substance but also in spirit.

C. POSSIBILITY OF DEFAULT IN INQUIRY PROCEDURE

All things considered, the inquiry the procedure adopted to deal with the complaints of sexual harassment at the workplace has assumed a sacrosanct position in law and cannot be undermined under any pretext whatsoever. Further, it has been made clear that fairness and reasonableness are inalienable parts of any procedure established by law;[25] therefore, the constitutional mission of equalization would not be achieved fully due to the general ignorance of the law,[26] or to that extent, by a blatant disregard in its implementation procedure. Thus, a policy change is needed in this context to secure the rights of an alleged perpetrator; so justice, if found guilty, could be rightfully delivered.

D. CONCLUSION 

“Writing laws is easy, but governing is difficult.” — Leo Tolstoy
From the thorough scrutiny of various provisions presented in this article, two things are quite evident: First, there exists legislation capable of combating harassment to female employees even in these extraordinary times, and then some; however, what lacks herein, is the proper implementation of its provisions. It is the duty of the legislature to pass cogent legislation; which they did. It is also the duty of the judiciary to impart justice based on this legislation; which they did.[27] But it is also the responsibility of an employer, keeping in mind the changed circumstances, to take every possible measure in order to implement this act—for all genders, which bring us to point two; harassment could be of any gender and is not limited to females; therefore, the inclusion of other genders in the anti-sexual harassment policy of an enterprise should also be done. Furthermore, since the act does not acknowledge other genders, the IC, when in the process of imparting justice should try to ensure the rights of other genders are not curtailed. 
A safe working environment has been recognized by the International Labour Organisation as an indicator for a decent work environment.[28] To ensure the existence of this environment, Vishaka Guidelines were put in place over 23 years ago, which were superseded by the POSH Act, but both shared the same spirit. So perhaps it isn’t only the guidelines which have to be followed. The spirit of these legislative drafts, their vision and their mission, i.e., to create a safe working environment, should also be realized. To quote Salmond, “The essence of law lies in the spirit, not in its letter, for the letter is significant only as being the external manifestation of the intention that underlies it.” Keeping that in mind, it has to be understood that calling a workplace synonymous to a safe place could not be forced upon, but only ensured through constant checks and balances, or in the words of Pulitzer prize winner Charles Duhigg, “It isn’t a war…it’s an embrace.”