In 1997, the Supreme Court in India formulated the Vishakha guidelines to…

Judicially framed guidelines are stop-gap directions the Supreme Court issues by exercising its writ jurisdiction under Article 32 to enforce a fundamental right, in the absence of any legislation on the point — the Court then declares that these directions shall have the force of "law declared" under Article 141 until Parliament enacts a dedicated statute. Such guidelines are tied to the particular institutional setting named in the judgment that created them, not to every context in which the underlying wrong could occur.

In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997), the case arose after Bhanwari Devi, a social worker employed under a Rajasthan government rural-development programme, was gang-raped in retaliation for trying to stop a child marriage while carrying out her official duties. Women's groups petitioned the Supreme Court under Article 32, arguing that the absence of any law on sexual harassment left working women without protection guaranteed by Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21. The Court agreed, and — treating its directions as law declared under Article 141 — laid down the Vishaka Guidelines requiring every employer to put in place an appropriate complaint mechanism, including a Complaints Committee headed by a woman where necessary, to prevent and redress sexual harassment of women at their place of work, remaining in force until Parliament enacted the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act — which introduced the statutory Internal Complaints Committee — in 2013.

Why the other settings do not fit:

• in vehicles — the incident and the Court's reasoning had no connection to transport; no vehicle-specific safeguard was carved out by this ruling.

• in marital relationship — conduct within a marriage is governed by separate criminal and matrimonial-law provisions, not by an employer-obligation framework.

• on streets — general public-place harassment falls under ordinary penal law on public conduct, a different legal track from the employer-complaint mechanism this ruling created.

Hence the guidelines were framed to protect women specifically at work places, making that the correct completion of the sentence.