They point to a large issue: Laws in India also often reflect the prejudices of society rather than maintaining constitutional ideals of equality and autonomy. Whether in court or in community, women’s agency continues to be questioned, regulated and banned.
Also read: Female-focused policies need to progress that is tangible and permanent
Allahabad High CourtDespite their status as agreed to adults, the interfathy couple refused to give police security, rational on the basis that the woman’s decision was “haste” and “peaceful, meaningful life” was unlikely to be a result. This not only disregards its right to create a personal option, it confirms a patriarchal belief that institutions should determine that a woman is capable of consent. The language of the court implemented social harmony, but what actually reflects was discomfort with autonomy that challenges the tradition.
This inconvenience was visible again when the same court reduced the allegations in the rape case associated with a five -year -old girl. Although the accused had allegedly improperly touched the child and attempted to uncontrollably, the act was not considered an attempt to rape the shock. The ruling defined general knowledge and expressed extensive resentment. While the Supreme Court has stayed the verdict, the fact that such an argument was presented by a constitutional court, suggests that the patriarchal outline still shapes the legal interpretation.
These decisions are not a disaster. In 2021, the Bombay High Court ruled that “Skin-to-Stenstation” needed to qualify as sexual harassment under the safety of children from the sexual offense act. Recently, the Chhattisgarh High Court acquitted a person accused of marital rape, citing the absence of a legal provision-The survivor clearly expressed non-peace.
These decisions reduce gender based violence For a checklist of compliance, removing the reference to strength, fear and force. Even more troublesome, they highlight a broad pattern: a resistance to recognize women’s rights to call ‘yes’ or ‘no’ and when they do either they either do it is taken seriously.
Also read: Mint Quick Edit | UCC of Uttarakhand: A Model Code?
This resistance plays in the background of a national crisis. According to the National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5), almost one of the three married women aged 18–49 in India has experienced spusal violence. In states like Bihar, the ratio is close to one in two. Nevertheless, these are some cases that make it to make official records. Many people become uncontrolled, buried under fear, stigma and comprehensive perception that the system is not designed to save women, but to silence women.
Gender-based violence is not only physical or sexual, it can be emotional, psychological or economic. This includes dynamics, financial freedom, education and healthcare refusal. And when public institutions support such control, they not only fail the survivors, but strengthen the systems that normalize violence in the first place.
The firmness of these approaches is clear in the public opinion. NFHS-5 found that 37% of women and 34% of men believe that a husband is appropriate to kill his wife under certain conditions-most often to argue, ignore the house, or to show disrespect to the in-laws. Even in people with 12 or more years of education, one of the four respondents assumed this belief. These criteria are not limited to homes, but are present in court rooms, law enforcement and policy places, shaping the decision, investigation and access to justice.
Legal improvement is necessary but not enough. We need to withstand patriarchal arguments that still control our legal logic. This means compulsory gender-sensitization training for judges, police personnel and others in the justice system. It also means that rewrite laws to reflect a contemporary understanding of consent, force and autonomy. That marital rape is still not criminalized, perhaps the most spectacular example of the refusal of the law of physical autonomy in marriage.
Equally important cases are heard and the remaining people are treated. Courts should go into traumatic processes that give dignity, privacy and priority to the agency. Often, women who come forward face cross-examination that are similar to the killing of the character, or with mistrust, delay and dismissal.
Also read: The judiciary cannot turn into a shelter for corrupt
We also need public awareness campaigns that address regressive norms and transfer perceptions. The Population Foundation of India is running a digital campaign ‘Desh Badalga, Jab Mard Badlega’ (better man for a better country) because we need to unknown harmful gender roles to men and become a partner in advancing equality.
These abstract are not ideal. They are essential for the creation of a justified and democratic society. When the courts valid moral policing, adults question the validity of consent or reduce the violence to the technology, indicating that women are not equal citizens and their rights can be interacted or rejected.
There is not only justice at stake, but a widespread promise of constitutional equality. India’s legal system should rise above social prejudice. It should not only protect people from violence, but also maintain the dignity, rights and autonomy of all women.
The author, respectively, are Executive Director and Senior Specialist -Media and Communication, Population Foundation of India