ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has accepted for hearing an appeal filed by singer and actress Meesha Shafi against the Lahore High Court (LHC) decision in a case of sexual harassment against singer Ali Zafar.
A three-member bench comprising Justice Mushir Alam, Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Syed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi heard the appeal. The Supreme Court had granted leave and will hear the case, her lawyers said, on whether it falls under the jurisdiction of sexual harassment. The court also issued notices to Advocate General Punjab and singer Ali Zafar.
Advocate Khawaja Ahmad Hosain requests the apex court to order that the case should be remanded back to the provincial ombudsperson with a direction that the complaint is heard and decided under the Protection against Harassment of Women at the Work Place Act 2010 on merits in accordance with the law.
Meesha Shafi had initially filed a complaint accusing Zafar of harassment with the provincial ombudsperson. On May 3, 2018, the case was rejected on technical grounds that she and Zafar “did not have an employer-employee relationship” and could not be heard in that forum
After her appeal was dismissed, Shafi then appealed against the decision before the Punjab governor, whom her legal team considered the competent authority to review any decisions made by the ombudsperson.
The Punjab governor upheld the ombudsperson’s decision dismissing her request on technical grounds. Shafi had subsequently approached the LHC to challenge the governor’s decision which also upheld the decision on October 11, 2019. Eventually, Shafi challenged the LHC decision before the Supreme Court.
Shafi’s counsel argued before the Supreme Court that the students at educational institutions were not employed but were also harassed and the allegations of harassment were prosecuted before the concerned forums.
In her petition, Shafi argued that the ombudsperson order was based solely on a provision in the contract between the petitioner and entity that had employed the petitioner on a contract of December 7, 2017.
According to the work plan under the contract, the petitioner was required to rehearse at the singer’s studio and to perform two songs in collaboration with Zafar. The appeal contended that the studio where she had to rehearse clearly falls within the definition of the workplace under the act.
