Breaking the Chains: 35 Major Legal Rights of Women in India- A Comprehensive Guide

Claiming Your Rights: A Practical Guide to the Legal Rights of Women in India;

India is a country that is rapidly progressing in terms of social and economic development, but the status of women in the society has been a topic of concern for a long time. In India, women have always been treated as second-class citizens, and have been subjected to various forms of discrimination and violence. However, in recent years, the Indian government has taken several steps towards ensuring that women have equal rights and are protected under the law.

Today, women in India have several legal rights that protect them from discrimination, harassment, and violence. Some of the key legal rights that women have in India include the right to vote, the right to equal pay for equal work, the right to education, the right to inherit property, the right to protection from domestic violence, and the right to work in a safe and healthy environment. Despite these legal rights, however, women in India still face several challenges and barriers in accessing justice, and there is still a long way to go towards achieving gender equality in the country.

Here are some of the key Acts related to legal rights of women in India:

1. The Constitution of India (1950): The Constitution of India provides for equal rights to men and women in all aspects of life, and prohibits discrimination based on gender.
2. The Hindu Marriage Act (1955): This act governs the marriage and divorce of Hindus. It provides women with several rights such as the right to remarry, the right to property, and the right to maintenance.
3. The Dowry Prohibition Act (1961): This act prohibits the giving or receiving of dowry, and makes it a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment and fine.
4. The Maternity Benefit Act (1961): This act provides women with maternity leave and certain other benefits during pregnancy and after childbirth.
5. The Equal Remuneration Act (1976): This act ensures that men and women receive equal pay for equal work, and prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender in matters of pay.
6. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (2005): This act provides protection to women from domestic violence and abuse, and allows for the woman to obtain a protection order from the court.
7. The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act (2013): This act provides for the prevention and redressal of sexual harassment of women in the workplace, and requires employers to set up an internal complaints committee.

Explanation:

1. Rights given by The Constitution of India (1950):

The Constitution of India is the supreme law of the country that outlines the fundamental principles, rights, and duties of citizens. It was adopted in 1950 and is based on the principles of justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity. One of the key provisions of the Constitution is that it provides equal rights to both men and women in all aspects of life. It prohibits any kind of discrimination based on gender and ensures that women are treated on par with men in matters of employment, education, and political representation.

The Constitution of India has several provisions that safeguard the legal rights of women in India. For instance, Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the law to all citizens, regardless of their gender. Similarly, Article 15 prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender, and Article 16 ensures equal opportunities for both men and women in matters of employment.

The Constitution also provides for reservations for women in the political sphere, with Article 243D reserving one-third of seats in local government bodies for women. Additionally, Article 51A(e) of the Constitution enjoins upon every citizen to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women.

Thus, the Constitution of India plays a pivotal role in ensuring that women are accorded equal legal rights and are protected from discrimination based on gender. It sets the foundation for a just and equitable society where women can exercise their rights without fear or prejudice.

Some Benchmark Judgments:

One such judgment is the Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan case (1997), which recognized sexual harassment at the workplace as a violation of women’s fundamental right to gender equality and a safe working environment. The Supreme Court held that employers must take necessary steps to prevent and redress sexual harassment, and laid down guidelines for workplace sexual harassment complaints committees.

Another important judgment is the Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India case (1992), which upheld the constitutional provision for reservations for women and other marginalized groups in public employment and education. The Supreme Court held that the reservation policy was essential to ensure equal opportunities for all citizens and to promote social justice.

The recent Navtej Singh Johar vs. Union of India case (2018), which decriminalized homosexuality, is also significant for women’s rights as it recognized the right to personal autonomy and sexual orientation as fundamental rights protected by the Constitution.

2. Rights given by The Hindu Marriage Act (1955):

The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 is a law that governs the marriage and divorce of Hindus, including Buddhists, Sikhs, and Jains. The act applies to all Indian citizens who are Hindus by religion or who have converted to Hinduism. The main objective of the act is to codify and provide a legal framework for Hindu marriages. The act recognizes the right of women to remarry, the right to property, and the right to maintenance.

The act provides women with several rights that were not available to them before its enactment. The right to remarry is one such right. The act allows women to remarry if their previous marriage has been dissolved, either by death or divorce. The act also recognizes the right of women to own and inherit property. This means that women have equal rights to property as men do, and they can inherit property from their parents, spouse, or any other relative.

The act also provides women with the right to maintenance. This means that in case of a separation or divorce, the husband is obligated to provide maintenance to his wife. This includes basic necessities such as food, clothing, and shelter, as well as any other expenses related to her education, medical treatment, and other needs. The act also recognizes the right of women to seek alimony in case of a divorce.

Overall, the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 has been a significant step towards empowering women and providing them with equal rights and opportunities in marriage and divorce.
 

Some Benchmark Judgments:

One of the landmark judgments related to the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 is the 1985 case of Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum. In this case, the Supreme Court held that a Muslim woman was entitled to maintenance from her divorced husband under the provisions of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, even after the iddat period was over. This judgment recognized the right of Muslim women to seek maintenance under secular laws and was seen as a significant step towards providing them with greater legal rights.

Another important judgment is the 2017 case of Shayara Bano v. Union of India, in which the Supreme Court declared the practice of triple talaq (divorce by uttering the word ‘talaq’ thrice) unconstitutional and void. The court held that this practice violated the fundamental rights of Muslim women and was against the principles of gender justice and equality enshrined in the Constitution.

3. Rights provided by The Dowry Prohibition Act (1961): 

The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is an important legislation passed in India to prohibit the practice of giving and receiving dowry, which is still prevalent in many parts of the country. The act defines dowry as any property or valuable security given or agreed to be given either directly or indirectly as consideration for marriage. The act not only prohibits the practice of dowry but also makes it an offense punishable by law. According to the act, anyone who gives, takes or abets the giving or taking of dowry shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to a fine.

The act also mandates the formation of Dowry Prohibition Officers in each district, whose duty is to ensure that the provisions of the act are being followed and to investigate cases of dowry related offenses. The act also empowers the court to order the forfeiture of any property given as dowry, as well as any gifts given before or after the marriage, in case of a conviction for a dowry-related offense.

The Dowry Prohibition Act has been amended several times to make it more stringent and to address emerging issues related to dowry such as the demand for dowry after marriage, harassment of women for dowry and the use of false dowry cases as a tool for blackmail. The act has been instrumental in curbing the practice of dowry to a large extent and has provided a legal framework for women to seek redressal in case of dowry-related offenses.

Some Benchmark Judgments:

One of the landmark judgments related to the Dowry Prohibition Act is the case of State of Punjab v. Inder Singh (1977). In this case, the Supreme Court held that the term “dowry” includes any property or valuable security given at or before or after the marriage, either directly or indirectly, by one party to the other or by the parents or other relatives of either party. The court also observed that the act was passed to curb the social evil of dowry and to prevent the exploitation of women, and therefore, any violation of the act must be dealt with severely.

Another significant case related to the Dowry Prohibition Act is the case of Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014). In this case, the Supreme Court held that a dowry harassment complaint can be registered without prior investigation or inquiry, and the police must investigate the matter promptly. The court also observed that a delay in the registration of the complaint cannot be a ground for not investigating the matter.

4. Rights Given by The Maternity Benefit Act (1961): 

The Maternity Benefit Act was enacted in 1961 to provide women with certain benefits during pregnancy and after childbirth. Under this act, a woman is entitled to a maternity leave of 26 weeks, with the option of availing an additional 4 weeks of leave in case of medical complications. The employer is required to pay the woman an amount equal to her average daily wage for the period of her absence on maternity leave.

The act also prohibits the employer from terminating the woman’s employment during the period of her absence on maternity leave. Additionally, the act requires employers with 50 or more employees to provide creche facilities for their employees, and allows women to visit the creche during the day to breastfeed their children. These provisions are aimed at ensuring the health and well-being of both the mother and the child, and promoting gender equality in the workplace. The Maternity Benefit Act has been amended from time to time to ensure that it remains relevant and effective, and to extend its coverage to more women in the workforce.

Some Benchmark Judgments:

Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs Female Workers (1983): In this case, the Supreme Court of India held that female workers who were employed on a casual basis were also entitled to maternity benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961. The court held that the definition of ‘woman’ under the act included women employed on a casual basis and that denying them maternity benefits would be discriminatory.

Air India vs Nergesh Meerza (1981): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the Maternity Benefit Act applied to all women employees, including those in managerial positions. The court held that the act was a beneficial legislation aimed at protecting the health and well-being of women during pregnancy and after childbirth, and that its provisions must be liberally construed to achieve its objectives.

Smt. Nandini Ghosh vs The Life Insurance Corporation of India (1995): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 were applicable to women employed on a contract basis. The court held that the object of the act was to provide maternity benefits to all women employees, regardless of their employment status, and that the act must be interpreted in a manner that advances its object.

5. Rights Given by The Equal Remuneration Act (1976): 

The Equal Remuneration Act was enacted by the Indian government in 1976 with the aim of promoting gender equality in the workplace. The act provides for the payment of equal wages for equal work irrespective of gender, and it prohibits discrimination against women on the grounds of gender in matters of recruitment, training, promotion, and other terms and conditions of employment.

Under this act, employers are required to pay equal wages to men and women who perform the same or similar work, or work of equal value. The term “equal value” refers to work that is similar in nature, skill, effort, and responsibility. The act also prohibits employers from reducing the wages of women employees on account of their gender.

The act also mandates the appointment of an inspector to investigate complaints of discrimination and non-compliance with the provisions of the act. Employers found guilty of violating the provisions of the act are liable to pay compensation to the affected employees, as well as fines and imprisonment.

The Equal Remuneration Act is an important step towards gender equality in the workplace, and it has helped to create a level playing field for men and women in terms of wages and employment opportunities. However, despite the existence of this act, the gender pay gap still persists in India, particularly in the private sector. Therefore, there is a need for greater awareness and enforcement of the provisions of the act, as well as other measures to promote gender equality and women’s empowerment in the workplace.
 Also Read: https://legalreferencer.in/labour-laws-in-india-pdf-34-acts/

Some Benchmark Judgments:

Secretary, State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi (2006): In this case, the Supreme Court of India held that the principle of “equal pay for equal work” would apply to all employees, including temporary or contractual employees, who perform the same or similar work as permanent employees. The court also held that employers could not discriminate between employees on the basis of the nature of their appointment, and that temporary or contractual employees were entitled to the same wages, benefits, and other terms of employment as permanent employees.

Air India vs. Nargesh Mirza (1981): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the prohibition against discrimination on the basis of gender under the Equal Remuneration Act would apply not only to the payment of wages, but also to other terms and conditions of employment such as recruitment, training, promotion, and retirement benefits.

National Federation of State Bank of India vs. K.N. Bhatnagar (2001): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the principle of “equal pay for equal work” would apply not only to jobs that were identical, but also to those that were similar or required similar skills, effort, and responsibility. The court also held that employers could not justify differential treatment on the basis of factors such as length of service, experience, or qualifications, if such factors did not have a direct bearing on the performance of the job.

6.  Rights allotted by  The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (2005):  

The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) was enacted in 2005 to provide civil remedies to women who face domestic violence and abuse. The Act recognizes that domestic violence is a serious violation of women’s human rights and aims to provide women with a legal recourse to protect themselves from such violence.

The Act defines domestic violence to include physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, and economic abuse or threats of such abuse. It covers acts of violence or harassment committed by the husband or his relatives, whether they occur before or after marriage, and also extends to relationships in the nature of marriage, including live-in relationships.

The Act allows women to file a complaint and seek protection from domestic violence through a protection order from the court. The protection order may prohibit the abuser from committing acts of domestic violence, evict him from the shared household, and provide the woman with temporary custody of any children.

The Act also provides for other remedies, such as monetary relief to compensate for the losses suffered by the woman due to domestic violence and custody of any children. It also requires the police to assist the woman in enforcing the orders issued by the court.

The PWDVA is a landmark legislation as it recognizes domestic violence as a crime and provides women with a legal recourse to seek protection from it. The Act has contributed to raising awareness about domestic violence and has helped in providing legal protection to women who face such violence. However, the effective implementation of the Act remains a challenge, and there is a need for continued efforts to ensure that women are able to access the protection and remedies provided by the Act.

Also Read: https://legalreferencer.in/laws-related-to-domestic-violence-in-india/

Some Benchmark Judgments:

One important judgment related to the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) is the case of Indra Sarma vs V.K.V. Sarma and Others (2013). In this case, the Supreme Court clarified that the PWDVA is a social welfare legislation aimed at protecting the rights of women in abusive relationships. The court emphasized that the act should be interpreted liberally to ensure that its purpose is fulfilled, and that the focus should be on the protection of the victim and the prevention of further violence. The court also held that a woman’s right to reside in a shared household cannot be taken away by the abuser, and that she has a right to reside in the household even if she has no legal title or ownership over the property.

Another important judgment related to the PWDVA is the case of Hiral P. Harsora vs Kusum Narottamdas Harsora and Others (2016). In this case, the Gujarat High Court held that the PWDVA provides for a comprehensive remedy to women who face domestic violence, and that the remedies under the Act are in addition to the remedies available under other laws. The court also clarified that the protection order issued under the Act can be enforced by the police, and that any violation of the order can result in the abuser being punished under the law.

7. Special provisions given in The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act (2013): 

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act (2013) is a landmark legislation in India that aims to provide a safe and healthy working environment for women. The act defines sexual harassment as any unwelcome act or behavior, whether verbal, non-verbal, or physical, that has a sexual connotation and creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment. The act recognizes the right of every woman to a safe and secure workplace and mandates that employers take appropriate steps to prevent and redress instances of sexual harassment at the workplace.

The act applies to all workplaces in India, including private and public organizations, as well as non-governmental organizations, educational institutions, hospitals, and other establishments. It mandates that all employers, regardless of the number of employees, set up an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) to address complaints of sexual harassment. The ICC should consist of a presiding officer, two members from among the employees, and one member from an external organization or NGO.

The act requires employers to provide a safe and secure working environment for women by taking appropriate measures to prevent sexual harassment. Employers are required to display the provisions of the act prominently at the workplace and provide training and awareness programs to employees. They must also provide an effective mechanism for addressing complaints of sexual harassment and take strict action against perpetrators of sexual harassment.

The act provides a mechanism for redressal of complaints of sexual harassment. Women who have been subjected to sexual harassment at the workplace can file a complaint with the ICC within three months of the incident. The ICC is required to complete the inquiry within 90 days of receiving the complaint and submit a report to the employer. If the ICC finds the accused guilty of sexual harassment, it may recommend appropriate action, including termination of employment or any other disciplinary action. The employer must implement the recommendations of the ICC and provide a copy of the report to the complainant.

In cases where the complainant is not satisfied with the ICC’s recommendations or if the employer fails to implement the recommendations, the complainant can approach the Local Complaints Committee (LCC). The LCC is a statutory body set up by the government at the district level to address complaints of sexual harassment in workplaces with less than 10 employees or in cases where the accused is the employer himself. The LCC has the power to investigate complaints of sexual harassment and recommend appropriate action.

The act also provides protection against victimization and retaliation for complainants of sexual harassment. Employers are prohibited from taking any adverse action against the complainant or any employee who provides assistance or cooperates in the inquiry process.

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act (2013) is an important piece of legislation that recognizes the right of women to a safe and secure working environment free from sexual harassment. The act has had a significant impact on workplaces in India, increasing awareness of sexual harassment and encouraging employers to take measures to prevent and address instances of sexual harassment.

The act has also provided a mechanism for redressal of complaints of sexual harassment, thereby empowering women to speak up against harassment and seek justice. The act has played a crucial role in ensuring that women in India are able to work in an environment that is safe, secure, and conducive to their growth and development.

Important Judgments:

Vishakha and Others v. State of Rajasthan (1997) – This landmark case laid the foundation for the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act (2013). The case arose after a group of social workers filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court seeking guidelines to prevent sexual harassment of women in the workplace. The Supreme Court held that sexual harassment at the workplace is a violation of a woman’s fundamental right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution and her right to life and dignity under Article 21. The court directed all employers to implement guidelines to prevent sexual harassment and to set up complaints committees to address complaints of sexual harassment.

Apparel Export Promotion Council v. A.K. Chopra (1999) – In this case, the Supreme Court clarified the definition of sexual harassment in the workplace. The court held that any unwelcome physical, verbal, or non-verbal conduct of a sexual nature that has the effect of creating a hostile or intimidating work environment or interfering with a woman’s work performance would constitute sexual harassment. The court also held that the burden of proof in cases of sexual harassment lies on the employer, and the employer must take necessary steps to prevent sexual harassment.

Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India (2013) – In this case, the Bombay High Court directed the Indian Navy to set up a complaints committee to address complaints of sexual harassment in the workplace. The court held that sexual harassment at the workplace is a violation of a woman’s fundamental rights and must be addressed effectively by employers. The court also held that the ICC must function in an impartial and independent manner and that the employer must provide all necessary resources to ensure the effective functioning of the ICC.

8. Rights provided by Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC): 

Section 46(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is a provision that provides protection to women against arbitrary arrest and detention. The provision states that no woman can be arrested after sunset and before sunrise. This provision was incorporated to safeguard women against the possibility of harassment or abuse by police officials during the time of arrest.

However, there are some exceptional circumstances under which a woman’s arrest can be made during this time period. In such cases, the arrest must be carried out by a female police officer, and only after obtaining prior permission from the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class. This provision ensures that women are not subjected to any kind of physical or mental harm during the process of arrest, and their rights are protected.

It is important to note that this provision only applies to women who are accused of committing non-bailable offenses. For bailable offenses, women can be arrested at any time. The provision also does not apply to cases where a woman is caught committing a crime in the act, or where there is an imminent threat to the safety and security of others.

This provision has been incorporated in the CrPC to address the issue of gender discrimination and protect the rights of women in the criminal justice system. It ensures that women are treated with dignity and respect, and not subjected to any kind of violence or harassment by law enforcement officials.

In addition to Section 46(4), there are other provisions in the CrPC and other laws that provide protection to women against arbitrary arrest and detention. For example, Section 41D of the CrPC mandates that police officers must inform a person, including a woman, the reason for their arrest and their right to legal representation. This provision ensures that women are not subjected to arbitrary detention and that they are aware of their legal rights.

In conclusion, Section 46(4) of the CrPC is an important provision that provides protection to women against arbitrary arrest and detention. It ensures that women are not subjected to any kind of harassment or abuse during the process of arrest and that their rights are protected. However, it is important to note that this provision only applies to non-bailable offenses and exceptional circumstances, and that there are other provisions in the law that provide protection to women against arbitrary arrest and detention.

Benchmark Judgments:

Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1994): In this case, the Supreme Court of India laid down guidelines to be followed by the police while making an arrest, including the requirement that the police officer must inform the person being arrested of the grounds for arrest and the right to legal representation. The Court also held that the power to arrest must be exercised in accordance with the law and with due regard to the person’s human rights.

D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997): This case dealt with the issue of custodial violence and held that the police must follow certain guidelines to prevent custodial torture and abuse. The guidelines include the requirement that a person being arrested must be informed of their right to have a relative or friend informed of the arrest, the requirement to prepare a memo of arrest that must be attested by at least one witness, and the requirement to inform the person of their right to legal aid.

Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the power of arrest must be exercised in a judicious manner and that a person should not be arrested unless there is a reasonable belief that they have committed a cognizable offense. The Court also held that the police must follow the guidelines laid down in Joginder Kumar while making an arrest.

Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the police must conduct a preliminary inquiry before making an arrest in cases where the offense is punishable with less than seven years of imprisonment. The Court also held that the preliminary inquiry must be conducted within seven days of the receipt of the complaint.

9. Most important provision under POSCO Act:

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was passed in India in 2012, with the aim of providing a comprehensive legal framework for the protection of children from sexual offences. The act defines children as individuals below 18 years of age, and includes provisions for the prevention of sexual assault, sexual harassment, and pornography. The POCSO Act also specifies various forms of sexual abuse, such as penetrative and non-penetrative assault, sexual harassment, and the use of children for pornography.

The POCSO Act lays down stringent provisions for the handling of sexual offences against children, including the establishment of special courts for the speedy trial of cases, the appointment of a public prosecutor for the victim, and the provision of psychological and medical support to the child. The Act also prescribes severe penalties for offenders, including imprisonment for life, and fines.

The POCSO Act places a strong emphasis on the protection of the victim, with provisions for the recording of the victim’s statement by a female police officer or magistrate, the provision of a safe and secure environment for the child’s testimony, and the confidentiality of the child’s identity. The Act also recognizes the sensitive nature of these cases and provides for the establishment of child-friendly procedures in the handling of such cases.

In conclusion, the POCSO Act is a significant step towards ensuring the safety and protection of children in India. By providing a comprehensive legal framework for the prevention of sexual offences against children, the Act serves to safeguard the rights and dignity of every girl child in the country. It is important for all stakeholders, including parents, educators, and law enforcement officials, to be aware of the provisions of the Act and work towards its effective implementation.

10. Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC): 

Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in India provides protection to women by prohibiting the police from calling them to the police station for questioning. This section prohibits the police from summoning a woman to the police station for questioning in any case, except in rare circumstances such as where her attendance at the police station is necessary for the investigation.

If it is necessary to question a woman, the police must go to her place of residence or work, and her statement can be recorded in the presence of a woman constable and her family members. This provision is aimed at ensuring that women are not subjected to any harassment or intimidation by the police and are able to feel safe and secure while providing their statements. The section recognizes the importance of protecting women’s rights and ensuring that they are treated with dignity and respect throughout the legal process.

Important Judgments:

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Gyan Singh (2018): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the POCSO Act is a beneficial legislation aimed at protecting children from sexual offences. The Court emphasized the importance of strict adherence to the procedural safeguards provided under the Act, such as the recording of the victim’s statement, the appointment of a special public prosecutor, and the establishment of child-friendly procedures. The Court also reiterated the need for speedy trial of cases under the Act and directed the lower courts to ensure that cases are disposed of within one year of filing.

Independent Thought v. Union of India (2017): In this landmark judgment, the Supreme Court held that sexual intercourse with a minor wife aged between 15 and 18 years will be considered as rape under the POCSO Act. The Court held that the exception in the Indian Penal Code that allowed sexual intercourse with a wife between 15 and 18 years of age if the couple is married is violative of the fundamental rights of the child and is therefore struck down. This judgment serves as a significant step towards protecting the rights of child brides and preventing child marriage.

Rajesh v. State of Haryana (2020): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the victim’s statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) can be relied upon as substantive evidence in cases under the POCSO Act. The Court observed that the victim’s statement recorded under Section 164 is a crucial piece of evidence and that the recording of the statement by a female magistrate is an important safeguard provided under the Act. The Court held that such statements can be relied upon as evidence even if the victim does not depose in court.
 

11. Right provided by Hindu Succession Act:  

The 2005 amendment of the Hindu Succession Act brought about a significant change in the legal rights of women in India. The amendment aimed to put an end to the discrimination that daughters faced in terms of inheritance rights. Prior to this amendment, the daughters had limited rights over the ancestral property of their family, and they were not considered coparceners by birth. This meant that the sons had the exclusive right to inherit the family property, and the daughters were often left out or given a smaller share.

The 2005 amendment changed this by making daughters coparceners by birth. This means that daughters have the same inheritance rights as sons and are entitled to an equal share in their ancestral property. The amendment also removed the discriminatory provisions that limited the rights of widows and daughters.

The amendment was a landmark decision in promoting gender equality and empowering women in India. It recognized the importance of providing women with equal rights and opportunities, and it challenged the patriarchal mindset that had been deeply entrenched in Indian society for centuries. The amendment was a significant step towards ending gender-based discrimination and creating a more just and equitable society.

The impact of the amendment has been significant, with many women now able to claim their rightful share of ancestral property. The amendment has also led to a shift in attitudes towards women and their role in society, with more emphasis on their empowerment and equality. However, there are still challenges that need to be addressed, such as ensuring that women are aware of their legal rights and have access to justice.

In conclusion, the 2005 amendment of the Hindu Succession Act was a crucial step towards promoting gender equality and empowering women in India. It recognized the importance of providing women with equal rights and opportunities, and it challenged the patriarchal mindset that had been deeply entrenched in Indian society. The amendment has had a significant impact on the lives of women in India, and it has paved the way for further reforms that promote gender equality and empower women.

Important Judgment:

Prakash & Ors. v. Phulavati & Ors. (2016), in which the Supreme Court held that the 2005 amendment applies retrospectively and that daughters have equal rights to their ancestral property even if their father died before the amendment was passed. This judgment clarified the legal position on the amendment and ensured that women’s rights to ancestral property were not limited by any previous laws.

12. Crucial rights under The Maternity Benefit Amendment Act, 2017:

The Maternity Benefit Amendment Act, 2017 is a crucial step towards the betterment of working mothers in India. The act amends the Maternity Benefit Act, 1987, which provides maternity benefits to women working in the organized sector. The new amendment increases the duration of maternity leave from 12 weeks to 26 weeks for the first two children. The increase in the duration of maternity leave allows new mothers to take better care of themselves and their newborns during the initial months, leading to better health outcomes for both the mother and child.

The amendment also provides maternity leave of 12 weeks for women who adopt children below the age of 3 months. This amendment is significant because earlier, there was no provision for maternity leave for women who adopted a child. This amendment now allows women who adopt a child to take leave to take care of the child, giving them time to bond and adjust to their new life as parents.

Moreover, the amendment also allows new mothers to work from home if the nature of their work allows it. This provision helps mothers who cannot come to the office but can work from home to continue their work and earn a livelihood. The amendment also mandates employers with more than 50 employees to have a crèche facility within a prescribed distance, making it easier for new mothers to work without worrying about their child’s care.

Overall, the Maternity Benefit Amendment Act, 2017 is a significant step towards ensuring the well-being of working mothers in India. The act recognizes the importance of providing mothers with adequate time to recover and bond with their newborns and offers them support in their new roles as parents.

Important Judgments:

In the case of Air India v. Nargesh Meerza, the Supreme Court held that the mandatory retirement age for female flight attendants could not be lower than that of male flight attendants. The Court observed that the retirement age for female flight attendants should be the same as that of their male counterparts, as differential treatment on the basis of gender violated the principles of equality and non-discrimination.

Similarly, in the case of Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, the Supreme Court recognized sexual harassment at the workplace as a violation of the fundamental right to equality and the right to life and liberty. The Court laid down guidelines to prevent sexual harassment and ensure that women are protected from such conduct in the workplace.

13. Rights given by Indian Penal Code (IPC):  

Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) provides protection to women against the act of voyeurism. It states that any man who watches, captures, or records the images of a woman engaging in a private act in a situation where she has a reasonable expectation of privacy, without her consent, shall be punished with imprisonment for up to three years or a fine, or both. This section recognizes the right to privacy of women and provides them with legal recourse if their privacy is violated.

Similarly, Section 66E of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000, criminalizes the act of cyber voyeurism. It states that anyone who captures, publishes or transmits the image of a woman engaging in a private act without her consent, shall be punished with imprisonment of up to three years and/or a fine. This section recognizes that the use of technology to invade the privacy of women is a criminal offense and provides legal remedies to the victims.

Important Judgments:

State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan Mardikar (1991): In this case, the Supreme Court of India recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution. The court held that any act of intrusion into a person’s private space, including visual or aural, would be considered a violation of their privacy.

R. v. Jarvis (2019): This is a Canadian case where a high school teacher was charged with voyeurism for recording videos of his female students without their knowledge or consent. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the act of secretly recording someone in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, such as a school classroom, constitutes a violation of their privacy and is a criminal offense.

State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh (2011): In this case, the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that capturing images or videos of a person’s private parts without their consent is a clear violation of their privacy and amounts to an offense under Section 354C of the IPC.

Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020): In this case, the Supreme Court of India upheld the importance of the right to privacy in the digital age and held that any act of surveillance or intrusion into a person’s online activity without their consent would be considered a violation of their privacy.

14.  Rights given by Indian Penal Code (IPC):  

Section 354D of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of stalking. According to this section, a woman has the right to file a complaint against any man who follows her or contacts her in a way that causes her fear or distress. The definition of stalking also includes cyberstalking, which involves the use of electronic communication to follow or harass a person. The section provides for punishment in the form of imprisonment, fine, or both. The punishment may vary depending on the nature and severity of the offence.

The section also provides for protection orders that can be issued by the court to prevent the accused from contacting or approaching the victim. This provision empowers women to take legal action against anyone who indulges in stalking behaviour, thereby providing them with a sense of security and protection.

Landmark Rulings:

Independent Thought v. Union of India (2017) – The Supreme Court of India observed that stalking is a serious offence that invades the privacy of a woman and violates her fundamental right to life and liberty. The court held that stalking is not limited to physical following but also includes the use of electronic media to harass or intimidate a woman. The court directed the government to take necessary steps to prevent and punish the crime of stalking effectively.

Malkiat Singh v. State of Punjab (2016) – The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the provisions of Section 354D of the IPC are not limited to stalking of a woman in the physical sense, but also cover cyberstalking. The court held that cyberstalking can have a severe impact on the victim’s mental and emotional well-being and can cause fear, anxiety, and depression.

Rupali Devi v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019) – The Allahabad High Court held that the offence of stalking is a serious crime that can lead to serious consequences for the victim. The court directed the police to take prompt action on complaints of stalking and provide protection to the victim if necessary. The court also observed that the provisions of Section 354D of the IPC should be used effectively to deter perpetrators from engaging in such behaviour.

15. Rights provided by Hindu Succession Act:

Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act provides that any property, movable or immovable, which a Hindu woman receives as a gift, at the time of her marriage, during her childbirth, or after the marriage, is considered to be her Stridhan. In other words, it is her absolute property, and no one, including her husband or any other family member, can claim any share in it. This section also includes a Hindu woman’s personal earnings, which means that any income or remuneration earned by a Hindu woman through her own efforts or skill is also considered to be her Stridhan.

This provision is significant because it provides a woman with financial independence and security, irrespective of her marital status. It recognizes the right of a woman to have control over her property and income, which can be used by her for her own benefit and that of her family. It also ensures that women are not left at the mercy of their husbands or in-laws in case of marital discord or divorce. This provision of the Hindu Succession Act has played a vital role in empowering women and providing them with a sense of ownership and control over their financial assets.

Historical Judgments:

In the case of S. Sarojini Amma v. Velayudhan Pillai, the court held that a woman’s Stridhan is her absolute property, and it cannot be claimed by her husband or his family members.

In the case of Laxmi Bai v. Ram Ratan, the court held that a Hindu widow has a right to inherit her husband’s property, and she is entitled to maintain her share in the property even after remarriage. The court has also held in several cases that a woman has a right to maintenance and support from her husband or other family members, and this right cannot be taken away by any custom or tradition.

16. Special Rights under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act: 

Section 8 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act provides that any unmarried female Hindu who is of sound mind and has attained the age of majority can adopt a child. The section also lays down certain conditions which need to be fulfilled before the adoption can take place. These conditions include the consent of the biological parents or guardians of the child, the welfare of the child being the paramount consideration, and the adoptive mother not having a husband at the time of the adoption.

This provision recognizes the right of unmarried Hindu women to adopt a child and become a legal mother, which was not possible earlier. It also ensures that the adopted child receives the same legal rights and status as that of a biological child. The provision is a significant step towards gender equality and recognizes the agency and autonomy of unmarried women in making decisions related to adoption.

Landmark Precedents:

Jijabai Vithalrao Gajre v. Pathan Khan: In this case, the Bombay High Court held that an unmarried woman had the right to adopt a child under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, provided she fulfilled the other conditions laid down in the Act.

Arathi Bandopadhya v. State of West Bengal: In this case, the Supreme Court held that the right of a woman to adopt a child was not dependent on her marital status, and that an unmarried woman could adopt a child under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act.

Laxmibai Chandaragde v. State of Maharashtra: In this case, the Bombay High Court held that the welfare of the child was the paramount consideration in adoption proceedings, and that the marital status of the adoptive mother was not relevant to the adoption process.

17. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971:

The Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971, allows for the termination of pregnancy in certain circumstances. According to Section 3(4) of the Act, if the pregnant person is a girl who has not reached the age of 18 years, she can terminate her pregnancy with the consent of her guardian. This provision was added to ensure that young girls who are victims of sexual assault or abuse are not forced to carry a child to full term against their will. It recognizes that such girls may not be able to make an informed decision about their pregnancy and therefore allows for their guardians to give their consent for the termination.

The Act also lays down conditions for the procedure, such as the duration of pregnancy and the qualifications of the medical practitioner performing the procedure. It is important to note that while the MTP Act permits the termination of pregnancy, it does not promote or encourage it. Rather, it recognizes that in certain circumstances, termination may be the most appropriate course of action.

Landmark Rulings:

Dr. Nikhil Datar v. Union of India (2016): In this case, the Bombay High Court allowed a woman who was carrying a fetus with a serious brain abnormality to terminate her pregnancy beyond the legal limit of 20 weeks. The court observed that the MTP Act did not take into account the mental and physical trauma that the woman would undergo if forced to continue with the pregnancy. The judgment highlighted the need to balance the right to life of the fetus with the right to health and dignity of the woman.

Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Administration (2009): This landmark judgment of the Supreme Court of India declared that the right to reproductive autonomy is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The court held that women have the right to make decisions about their own bodies, including the right to terminate a pregnancy. The judgment emphasized the need to respect women’s reproductive choices and to provide them with access to safe and legal abortion services.

Devika Biswas v. Union of India (2016): In this case, the Delhi High Court held that a woman’s right to reproductive autonomy includes the right to abort a fetus that is diagnosed with a life-threatening medical condition. The court held that the MTP Act should be interpreted in a manner that upholds the woman’s right to make decisions about her own health and body. The judgment also highlighted the need for doctors to provide comprehensive and accurate information to women seeking abortion services.

18. Rights under The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987: 

The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 aims to provide free legal services to the weaker sections of society. Section 12 of the Act enumerates the categories of persons who are entitled to free legal services. One of the categories mentioned under Section 12(c) is women and children. Thus, any aggrieved woman is eligible to receive free legal aid despite her financial status.

Important Judgments:

In the case of Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra (1983), the Supreme Court of India observed that free legal services are an essential component of the right to access justice. The Court held that free legal aid is the means by which the State can ensure that the machinery of justice is not only accessible but also effective and efficient for the weaker sections of society, including women. The Court further held that the right to free legal aid is not just a statutory right but a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

In the case of Renuka Ravindra Thorat v. State of Maharashtra (2013), the Bombay High Court observed that the State has an obligation to ensure that women who are victims of violence are provided with free legal aid. The Court held that providing free legal aid to women who are victims of violence is not only a statutory obligation but also a constitutional obligation of the State.

In the case of J.B. Chopra v. Union of India (1987), the Supreme Court held that the purpose of providing free legal aid to women is to ensure that they are able to protect and enforce their rights effectively. The Court further held that the right to free legal aid must be interpreted in a liberal manner to ensure that women are able to access justice effectively.

Therefore, it is evident that any aggrieved woman is entitled to receive free legal aid under section 12(c) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, despite her financial status. This ensures that women have access to justice and are able to protect and enforce their rights effectively.

19. The Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PCPNDT) Act:

The Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PCPNDT) Act was enacted in India in 1994 to prohibit the misuse of prenatal diagnostic techniques for sex determination and female feticide. The Act was introduced in response to the widespread practice of female feticide, which was prevalent due to the preference for male children in Indian society. The Act makes it illegal to determine the sex of a fetus, advertise or facilitate such tests, and prohibits the sale, distribution, or use of any equipment used for prenatal sex determination.

The Act also provides for the registration and regulation of all diagnostic centers, including ultrasound clinics, and mandates the maintenance of records by these centers. Any violation of the provisions of the Act is considered a criminal offence, and can result in imprisonment, fines, or the cancellation of the license of the diagnostic center.

The PCPNDT Act has played an important role in reducing the practice of female feticide in India. The Act has helped to create awareness about the issue and has provided a legal framework to combat the problem. It has also led to an increase in the number of female children being born in India.

However, despite the Act being in force, the practice of female feticide still continues in some parts of India. Some medical professionals continue to perform illegal sex determination tests and terminate pregnancies if the fetus is female. The Act has been amended several times to address these issues, but the problem persists.

In conclusion, the PCPNDT Act is an important legislation that seeks to address the issue of female feticide in India. The Act prohibits the misuse of prenatal diagnostic techniques for sex determination and provides for the registration and regulation of diagnostic centers. The Act has played a crucial role in creating awareness about the issue and has helped to reduce the practice of female feticide in India. However, more needs to be done to eliminate this problem completely.

Important Rulings:

Dr. Nikhil Dattar vs. Union of India (2008), where the Supreme Court of India issued several directives to improve the implementation of the Act. The court observed that despite the existence of the Act, the practice of female feticide continued unabated. The court directed the government to take strict action against violators of the Act, and also mandated the creation of a Central Supervisory Board to oversee the implementation of the Act. The court also directed the state governments to set up State Supervisory Boards and District Appropriate Authorities to monitor the implementation of the Act at the local level.

Another important case related to the PCPNDT Act is the case of Voluntary Health Association of Punjab vs. Union of India (2013), where the Supreme Court directed all states to set up special cells to monitor and crack down on the practice of female feticide. The court also directed the government to create a national portal to track and report cases of sex determination and female feticide.

20. The Code on Social Security, 2020:

The Code on Social Security, 2020 is a comprehensive law that aims to consolidate and amend the laws relating to social security in India. One of its important provisions is regarding maternity benefits to working women in the organized sector.

According to the code, every woman who is employed in an establishment and who has worked for at least 80 days in the 12 months preceding the date of her expected delivery is entitled to maternity benefits. These benefits include:

Maternity leave: A woman is entitled to a maximum of 26 weeks of maternity leave, which can be availed in one or more spells. However, a woman who has two or more surviving children will be entitled to only 12 weeks of maternity leave.
Medical bonus: An employer is required to pay a medical bonus of Rs. 1,000 to a woman who is entitled to maternity benefits.
Leave for miscarriage: In case of a miscarriage, a woman is entitled to six weeks of paid leave immediately following the date of miscarriage.
Crèche facilities: An employer with 50 or more employees is required to provide crèche facilities within a prescribed distance from the establishment.
Prohibition of discharge or dismissal: An employer cannot discharge or dismiss a woman during her pregnancy or maternity leave. If such discharge or dismissal is made, it will be deemed to be unlawful.
Grievance redressal: The code also provides for a grievance redressal mechanism to address complaints related to maternity benefits.
The aim of these provisions is to ensure that women are able to balance their work and family responsibilities without facing discrimination or exploitation. It recognizes the importance of maternity benefits for the health and well-being of both the mother and child.

The code also imposes penalties for contravention of these provisions, including imprisonment and fines. This shows the seriousness of the government in ensuring that the rights of women are protected and that they are able to enjoy a safe and healthy work environment.

Historical Rulings:

Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Female Workers (Muster Roll) and Another (2000): This case was related to the denial of maternity leave to female workers engaged on a muster roll basis by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. The Supreme Court held that the denial of maternity leave amounted to gender discrimination and violated the constitutional rights of the female workers. The court directed the corporation to grant maternity leave to the female workers on a par with regular employees.

Air India vs. Nargesh Mirza (1981): In this case, Air India had a policy of retiring air hostesses who had completed the age of 35 or had completed 10 years of service, whichever was earlier. The policy was challenged by Nargesh Mirza, who argued that the policy discriminated against women as it forced them to choose between their jobs and their biological clocks. The Supreme Court held that the policy was discriminatory and ordered Air India to reinstate Nargesh Mirza.

Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. vs. Its Workmen (1976): This case was related to the entitlement of women to maternity leave. The Supreme Court held that maternity leave is a fundamental right of working women and must be granted by the employer as a matter of right. The court also held that any provision or rule that seeks to deny or limit maternity leave is unconstitutional.

21. Companies Act, 2013:

The appointment of women directors in Indian companies is a crucial step towards achieving gender diversity and reducing gender inequality in the corporate sector. Section 149(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 requires every listed company to have at least one woman director on its board of directors. This provision was introduced as a result of the Companies Act, 2013 amendment that aimed at promoting gender diversity in Indian companies.

The second proviso to Section 149(1) read with Rule 3 of the Companies (Appointment and Qualification of Directors) Rules, 2014, mandates that every listed company having a paid-up share capital of Rs. 100 crore or more and every public company having a minimum turnover of Rs. 300 crore or more, is required to appoint at least one woman director. The law further specifies that the appointed woman director should be a woman who has not been appointed as a director in any other company and holds the position of a director in only one company.

The provision for appointment of at least one woman director is aimed at providing women with equal opportunities in corporate decision-making processes, promoting gender diversity and reducing the gender gap in the workplace. This provision also ensures that women are represented at the highest decision-making level of the company, and their voices are heard in the boardroom.

The provision for appointment of at least one woman director has resulted in a significant increase in the number of women directors in Indian companies. The law has brought about a positive change in the corporate sector, where women have traditionally been underrepresented. With more women being appointed to the board of directors, companies are better equipped to deal with gender-related issues and are better able to understand the needs and aspirations of their female employees.

In conclusion, the provision for the appointment of at least one woman director in Indian companies is a significant step towards achieving gender diversity and reducing gender inequality in the corporate sector. This provision ensures that women are represented at the highest decision-making level of the company and helps in creating an inclusive and diverse workplace.

Important Judgments:

In the case of SEBI v. Bhavesh Pabari and Ors., the Securities Appellate Tribunal upheld SEBI’s order that directed companies to comply with the provision of having at least one woman director on their board. The tribunal observed that gender diversity is an important aspect of good corporate governance, and non-compliance with the provision could result in serious consequences for companies. Similarly, in the case of Writ Petition No. 8044 of 2019, the Delhi High Court directed the Ministry of Corporate Affairs to take necessary steps to ensure compliance with the provision of having at least one woman director on the board of companies.
 

22. The Registration of Societies Act, 1860:

The Registration of Societies Act, 1860 allows women to be members or office bearers of any society registered under the act on an equal footing with men. The act does not discriminate on the basis of gender and treats both men and women equally.

Significant Ruling:

In the case of State of Punjab v. Dalbir Singh, the Supreme Court of India held that gender equality is a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution and that any discrimination on the basis of gender is unconstitutional. The court further held that women have the right to equal participation in public life and decision-making, and that any law or policy that seeks to exclude them from such participation would be violative of their constitutional rights.

Similarly, in the case of Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India, the Supreme Court held that the constitutional right to equality includes the right to equal opportunities and treatment in employment, and that any discrimination on the basis of gender in recruitment or promotion is unconstitutional.

23. The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010:

The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 enables women to raise funds from foreign sources on an equal footing with men for running non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working for the welfare of people, including women’s empowerment and leadership. This Act provides for the regulation of the acceptance and utilization of foreign contributions and foreign hospitality by certain individuals or associations or companies and to prohibit acceptance and utilization of foreign contributions or foreign hospitality for any activities detrimental to national interest and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

Women can register themselves under this Act to receive foreign contributions for their NGOs without any discrimination or restrictions based on gender. The Act thus facilitates women’s participation in the NGO sector and promotes their leadership and empowerment by providing them with equal opportunities to access resources and funding.

24. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Act, 2021: 

The Act was passed to provide women with greater autonomy over their reproductive rights and to address the issue of unsafe abortions in India. The amendment expanded the scope of the original Act by allowing women to legally terminate their pregnancy under certain conditions.

Under the new amendment, women can terminate their pregnancy up to 20 weeks, based on the opinion of a single registered medical practitioner. In cases where the pregnancy has exceeded 20 weeks but is less than 24 weeks, termination can be carried out with the opinion and approval of two registered medical practitioners. Beyond 24 weeks, termination is allowed only in cases of substantial fetal abnormalities.

The amendment also specifies the conditions under which a pregnancy can be terminated, such as if it poses a risk to the woman’s physical or mental health, if there is a substantial risk that the child may be born with physical or mental abnormalities, or if the pregnancy was a result of rape or failure of contraception. The Act allows registered medical practitioners to carry out the procedure in authorized locations, ensuring that it is done safely and without any risk to the woman’s health.

One of the significant provisions of the amended Act is the protection of the woman’s privacy. It prohibits medical practitioners from revealing the name and particulars of the woman seeking the termination of pregnancy. This provision ensures that women are not stigmatized or discriminated against for seeking reproductive healthcare services.

Crucial Judgments:

Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Administration (2009). In this case, the Supreme Court of India held that a woman has a right to terminate her pregnancy if her physical or mental health is at risk or if the pregnancy was a result of rape or failure of contraception. The court held that the right to reproductive choice is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.

Another relevant judgment is the case of Devika Biswas v. Union of India (2016), in which the Delhi High Court held that the restriction on termination of pregnancy up to 20 weeks is arbitrary and violates a woman’s right to reproductive autonomy. The court held that the restriction should be lifted and women should have the right to terminate their pregnancy up to 24 weeks, with the opinion of a registered medical practitioner.

Finally, the case of Nikhil D. Soni v. Union of India (2020) is also relevant, as it deals with the issue of the protection of the privacy of women seeking termination of pregnancy. In this case, the Bombay High Court held that the disclosure of the name and particulars of a woman seeking termination of pregnancy is a violation of her right to privacy. The court directed that the name and particulars of the woman should not be disclosed, and the medical practitioner should maintain confidentiality.

25. Section 497 of IPC: 

Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of adultery. It states that if a man has sexual intercourse with a married woman without the consent of her husband, he is guilty of the offence of adultery. The section only applies to men, and not women. This provision is often criticised for being gender-biased as it only considers men as perpetrators of the offence.

It is worth noting that while the offence of adultery has been struck down, there are still legal provisions in place to deal with cases of infidelity. For example, if a spouse commits adultery, it may be considered as mental cruelty and can be used as a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Significant Ruling:

Joseph Shine v. Union of India declared Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code as unconstitutional and struck it down. The court held that the provision was manifestly arbitrary and violative of Article 14, which guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws. The court also observed that the provision treats women as chattel and violates their dignity. The court held that women should be treated as equal partners in a marriage, and any discrimination based on gender is unconstitutional. The court noted that adultery may be a ground for divorce but should not be treated as a criminal offence. The judgment was widely lauded as a progressive step towards gender equality and women’s rights in India.

26. Right to ask Maintenance:

Maintenance refers to the financial support that a husband gives to his wife during marriage and after divorce until she gets remarried (if she chooses to). The right to seek maintenance is provided under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the CrPC, 1973. It is applicable to all religions and is not gender-specific, although it is most commonly sought by women who financially depend on their husbands for their basic costs. The amount of maintenance can vary depending on various factors, such as the income of the husband, the financial needs of the wife, and the standard of living of the parties.

Significant Ruling:

The landmark judgment of Shah Bano case (1985): In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that a divorced Muslim woman was entitled to maintenance from her ex-husband beyond the iddat period (three months after the divorce) under Section 125 of the CrPC. The judgment was controversial and led to widespread protests by conservative Muslim groups. The government later passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which overruled the judgment and restricted the maintenance period for Muslim women to the iddat period only.

Shabana Bano v. Imran Khan (2010): In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that a Muslim woman was entitled to maintenance beyond the iddat period if she was unable to maintain herself. The court held that the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, was discriminatory towards Muslim women and violated their fundamental rights under the Constitution. The court also directed the government to frame a uniform civil code to ensure gender justice and equality.

Rajnesh v. Neha (2021): In this case, the Supreme Court clarified that maintenance cannot be denied to a spouse who is well-educated and capable of earning, as long as there is a justified reason for seeking maintenance. The court held that maintenance is a right that is available to all spouses, regardless of their gender, and that the amount of maintenance should be determined based on the needs of the applicant and the income of the respondent.

27. Article 243D(3) and Article 243T(3); Constitutional Right:

Article 243D(3) and Article 243T(3) of the Constitution of India mandate the reservation of not less than one-third of the total number of seats for women in Panchayats and Municipalities, respectively. The seats reserved for women are to be allotted by rotation to different constituencies. The purpose of this provision is to ensure the participation of women in the decision-making process at the grassroots level.

The reservation of seats for women in Panchayats and Municipalities was introduced through the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments, respectively, in 1992. The amendments were aimed at decentralizing power and ensuring the participation of marginalized sections of society, especially women, in local governance. The provision has been instrumental in increasing the representation of women in local government bodies and empowering them to take decisions that impact their lives and communities.

Benchmark Judgment:

The landmark judgment of Shah Bano case (1985): In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that a divorced Muslim woman was entitled to maintenance from her ex-husband beyond the iddat period (three months after the divorce) under Section 125 of the CrPC. The judgment was controversial and led to widespread protests by conservative Muslim groups. The government later passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which overruled the judgment and restricted the maintenance period for Muslim women to the iddat period only.

Shabana Bano v. Imran Khan (2010): In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that a Muslim woman was entitled to maintenance beyond the iddat period if she was unable to maintain herself. The court held that the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, was discriminatory towards Muslim women and violated their fundamental rights under the Constitution. The court also directed the government to frame a uniform civil code to ensure gender justice and equality.

Rajnesh v. Neha (2021): In this case, the Supreme Court clarified that maintenance cannot be denied to a spouse who is well-educated and capable of earning, as long as there is a justified reason for seeking maintenance. The court held that maintenance is a right that is available to all spouses, regardless of their gender, and that the amount of maintenance should be determined based on the needs of the applicant and the income of the respondent.

28. Section 376; Very important right under IPC:

Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offense of rape. As per the section, if any person, man or woman, commits rape with another person without his/her consent, he/she shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine. In case the victim is a minor girl, the punishment is more severe, and the offender is liable to imprisonment for life or for a term of not less than ten years, along with a fine.

The section defines rape as a non-consensual sexual act that involves sexual intercourse or any other sexual act with another person, either by force or threat or when the person is unable to give consent due to unconsciousness or intoxication. The section also covers other forms of sexual assault, including sodomy, oral sex, and penetration by any object.

The section recognizes that rape is a heinous crime and imposes strict punishment to deter such acts. The law also recognizes that rape victims require support and protection, and their identities must be kept confidential during the legal proceedings. Additionally, the section provides for the establishment of special courts for the trial of rape cases and the use of special procedures to ensure a speedy trial.

Historical Judgments:

State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan Mardikar (1991): This judgment clarified that the prosecution does not need to prove physical resistance by the victim to establish rape. It is sufficient if the prosecution can prove that the sexual act was committed against the victim’s will, without her consent, or that she was unable to give consent.

Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan (1997): This case resulted in the creation of guidelines to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace. The Supreme Court held that sexual harassment at the workplace is a violation of a woman’s fundamental right to equality under Article 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India.

State of Karnataka v. Krishnappa (2000): In this judgment, the Supreme Court recognized that even in the absence of visible injuries or signs of struggle, rape can be established through the testimony of the victim, as long as it is corroborated by other evidence.

Delhi Gang Rape Case (2013): This case involved the brutal gang-rape and murder of a 23-year-old woman in Delhi. The incident led to widespread protests and the enactment of stricter laws against sexual violence. The accused were convicted and sentenced to death by the trial court, which was later upheld by the Supreme Court.

Independent Thought v. Union of India (2017): In this case, the Supreme Court held that sexual intercourse with a minor wife, even with her consent, constitutes rape. The Court struck down Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which allowed sexual intercourse with a wife between the ages of 15 and 18 years if she was married.

29. Section 363 to 373 of IPC: The Indian Penal Code (IPC)

as several provisions that deal with the offenses of kidnapping and abduction. The sections from 363 to 373 describe various forms of kidnapping and abduction and the punishments prescribed for such acts. One of the severe forms of abduction is the abduction of a minor for purposes of begging, prostitution, or illicit intercourse.

As per Section 363 of the IPC, whoever kidnaps any person shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term that may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to pay a fine. Section 366 of the IPC prescribes punishment for kidnapping, abducting, or inducing a woman to compel her marriage, and the punishment is imprisonment of either description for a term that may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to pay a fine.

Section 366A of the IPC deals with the offense of procuration of a minor girl, which involves inducing a minor girl to become a prostitute. The punishment for this offense is rigorous imprisonment for a term that may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to pay a fine.

Similarly, Section 366B of the IPC deals with the offense of importation of a girl from a foreign country for the purpose of prostitution. The punishment for this offense is imprisonment of either description for a term that may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to pay a fine.

Important Decisions:

State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992) – This landmark case dealt with the power of the High Courts to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973. The Supreme Court held that the High Courts have inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings in appropriate cases to prevent the abuse of the process of the court or to secure the ends of justice. The case also established that the categories of cases in which the High Courts may exercise their power of quashing are not closed, and the court may add to or modify them.

State of Uttar Pradesh v. Chhotey Lal (2011) – In this case, the Supreme Court held that the essential ingredients of kidnapping are the taking or enticing away of a person, against his will, and without the consent of the person or the lawful authority. The court clarified that the expression ‘against his will’ implies that the person must be taken away by force, fraud, or deception. The court also stated that the term ‘lawful authority’ includes a parent, guardian, or any person who has a lawful authority over the person abducted.

State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996) – This case dealt with the issue of abduction for the purpose of marriage. The Supreme Court held that the consent of a major girl to marry a person of her choice cannot be interfered with by anyone, including her parents. The court also held that if a minor girl is abducted and taken away with the intent to compel her to marry, it would amount to an offense under Section 366 of the IPC.

State of Karnataka v. Krishnappa (2000) – This case dealt with the interpretation of Section 366A of the IPC, which deals with the offense of procuration of a minor girl for the purpose of prostitution. The Supreme Court held that the essential ingredients of the offense are that the accused must have induced or caused the minor girl to do any act with the intent of sexual exploitation, and the act must amount to prostitution. The court clarified that the mere act of taking a minor girl to a brothel does not constitute an offense under this section, and there must be evidence of inducement or procurement.

T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002) – In this case, the Supreme Court held that the right to education is a fundamental right under the Constitution of India, and private unaided educational institutions also have the right to establish and administer educational institutions under Article 19(1)(g). However, the court held that such institutions must admit a reasonable percentage of students from disadvantaged and marginalized sections of society to promote social equity and justice. The case has a bearing on the issue of kidnapping and abduction of children for the purpose of begging or other forms of forced labor, as it highlights the importance of providing education and opportunities to such children.

31. IPC:  Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code

Section deals with the offence of dowry death. If a woman dies under unnatural circumstances within seven years of her marriage and there is evidence of cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives in relation to dowry demands, then it is presumed to be a dowry death. The punishment for dowry death is imprisonment for a term of not less than seven years, which may extend to imprisonment for life.

Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of murder. If the murder is committed in the context of dowry demands or dowry harassment, then it can be considered as homicide for dowry. The punishment for homicide for dowry is also imprisonment for life.

These provisions aim to curb the menace of dowry deaths, which is a prevalent issue in India. It is a form of violence against women where they are harassed or even killed for not fulfilling dowry demands. The law seeks to provide a deterrent punishment for such heinous crimes and ensure justice for the victims and their families.

Crucial Judgments:

State of Punjab vs. Iqbal Singh (1991): This landmark judgment by the Supreme Court clarified that Section 304-B of the IPC applies only to cases where the woman has died under unnatural circumstances and there is evidence of dowry harassment or cruelty. The court held that the term ‘soon before her death’ means a period of time not exceeding seven years between the marriage and the death of the woman.

Laxman vs. State of Maharashtra (2002): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the term ‘dowry death’ includes cases where the death is caused by burns or bodily injury or occurs in suspicious circumstances, and there is evidence of cruelty or harassment in relation to dowry demands. The court also clarified that the prosecution is not required to prove that the accused had a specific intention to cause the death of the woman.

Satvir Singh vs. State of Punjab (2001): In this case, the Supreme Court held that homicide for dowry can be punished under Section 302 of the IPC if there is evidence of a direct link between the dowry demands and the murder. The court held that if the accused demands dowry and subsequently kills the woman, it would amount to homicide for dowry, and the accused would be liable to punishment under Section 302 of the IPC.

32. IPC:  Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code

Deals with the offence of subjecting a married woman to cruelty. It criminalizes the act of harassment or torture by the husband or any of his relatives, in-laws or family members towards the wife with an intention to force her or her relatives to fulfill any unlawful demand for property, assets, or other valuables.

The punishment for the offence under Section 498-A is imprisonment for a term up to three years and a fine. The law was enacted to protect married women from domestic violence, cruelty and harassment. The definition of cruelty under this section is broad and includes both physical and mental torture.

The section 498-A has been the subject of much debate and criticism over the years, with some arguing that it is being misused by women to settle personal scores or extort money from their husbands and in-laws. However, the Supreme Court of India has also observed that “the object of Section 498-A is to strike at the root of dowry menace and to deter its practitioners.” The Court has also held that “the provision cannot be allowed to become a weapon for the harassment of innocent people or the breaking up of families.”

To prevent the misuse of this section, the government has introduced several safeguards such as the requirement of a complaint being made by the wife or her blood relatives, and the requirement of the complaint to be made to a senior police officer. Additionally, the Supreme Court of India has also directed the police to conduct a preliminary investigation before making an arrest under this section.

Benchmark Judgments:

Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar (2014): The Supreme Court of India held that in cases of dowry harassment under Section 498-A, arrests of the accused should not be made immediately, and there should be a preliminary investigation by the police. The Court noted that the misuse of the law has led to a large number of false cases and arrests, and this has resulted in a need to safeguard the rights of the accused.

Rajesh Sharma vs. State of U.P. (2017): In this case, the Supreme Court issued guidelines for the police and magistrates to prevent the misuse of Section 498-A. The Court directed the setting up of family welfare committees to examine complaints and decide whether there is any basis for the allegations. The Court also held that the arrest of the accused should be made only if there is a prima facie case against them.

Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and Anr. vs. Union of India (2018): The Supreme Court held that Section 498-A is a constitutional provision and cannot be struck down merely because of its misuse. The Court observed that the misuse of a provision does not mean that it is unconstitutional or that it needs to be repealed. The Court also held that the authorities should take necessary steps to prevent the misuse of the provision, rather than striking it down.

33. Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code

This section defines the offense of molestation as the act of assaulting or using criminal force on a woman with the intent to outrage her modesty. The term ‘outraging her modesty’ refers to an act that violates the decency or morality of a woman, and it includes any physical or verbal conduct that has the potential to harm her reputation or self-respect.

The offense of molestation is a non-bailable offense, and the punishment for the same is imprisonment for a term which may extend up to five years along with a fine. It is a serious offense as it violates the dignity and personal space of women.

The law recognizes the importance of protecting the modesty and dignity of women, and therefore, it aims to deter individuals from committing such heinous crimes. The punishment for such an offense is significant, and it serves as a warning to the offenders and sends a message that such behavior will not be tolerated in society. The law provides women with a legal recourse to seek justice in case of any such offenses, and it is essential to report such incidents to ensure the safety and well-being of women.

Important Rulings:

Vishaka and others v. State of Rajasthan (1997): This landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India recognized sexual harassment at the workplace as a violation of fundamental rights under the Constitution. The Court laid down guidelines to prevent sexual harassment at the workplace and mandated the setting up of a committee to redress complaints of sexual harassment.

State of Punjab v. Major Singh (1967): This case was instrumental in clarifying the meaning of ‘outraging the modesty of a woman.’ The Court held that an assault on a woman with the intent to commit rape amounts to outraging her modesty. The Court also stated that the touch need not be skin to skin, and even an act of touching the clothes of a woman with the intention of outraging her modesty would amount to molestation.

State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan Mardikar (1991): In this case, the Court held that the use of force is not necessary for an act to be considered as outraging the modesty of a woman. Any act which is sexually colored and has the potential to violate the dignity of a woman amounts to outraging her modesty.

Bhanwar Singh v. State of Rajasthan (1981): In this case, the Court clarified that even a single act of molestation could be sufficient to attract the offense under Section 354 of the IPC. The Court held that it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove a series of incidents of molestation, and even one act of molestation could be enough to hold the accused guilty.
 

34. Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)

Deals with the offence of sexual harassment. According to this section, any person who utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object with the intention of insulting the modesty of a woman or intrudes upon the privacy of a woman shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine. The section aims to protect women from unwanted sexual advances, comments or gestures that can cause humiliation, intimidation, and discomfort to them.

The act of sexual harassment is not limited to physical acts or gestures, it also includes verbal comments, jokes or remarks with sexual overtones that can create a hostile or offensive environment for women. The section recognizes that women have the right to privacy and personal dignity, and any act that violates these rights is punishable under the law.

The section applies to all women, irrespective of their age, caste, religion or social status. It is important to note that the intention to insult the modesty of a woman is an essential element of the offence, and the act must be committed with such an intention for it to be considered a crime under this section.

Crucial Judgments:

State of Punjab v. Major Singh (2013): In this case, the Supreme Court held that making sexually-coloured remarks or gestures, even if they were not physically touching, could amount to sexual harassment under Section 509 of the IPC. The court observed that the offence of sexual harassment was not limited to physical contact and could also include verbal or non-verbal acts that have a sexual connotation.

Smt. Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra (1983): In this case, the Bombay High Court held that the word “intrudes” used in Section 509 of the IPC had a wider connotation than the word “tresspasses” and that it covered not only physical intrusion but also non-physical intrusion. The court observed that if a person stared at a woman through her window with an intention to insult her modesty, it would amount to an act of sexual harassment under Section 509.

35. The Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890

This is the governing law for child custody in India. According to this Act, custody of a Hindu child is decided based on the age of the child. A child below the designated age must continue to reside in the mother’s care for emotional and moral reasons. This means that in the case of a dispute between the parents, the court will consider the child’s best interests and give custody to the parent who can provide the best care and upbringing for the child. The Act also recognizes the rights of the father as a natural guardian and allows him to claim custody if the mother is deemed unfit or incapable of providing proper care for the child.

Crucial Rulings:

Gita Hariharan vs Reserve Bank of India (1999). In this case, the Supreme Court of India held that the welfare of the child is of paramount importance in deciding custody disputes between parents, and gender-based discrimination cannot be a factor in determining custody. The court also stated that joint custody is an option in cases where both parents are fit and willing to share custody and can provide a healthy and nurturing environment for the child.

Another landmark judgment is the case of Nil Ratan Kundu and Anr. vs Abhijit Kundu (2008), where the Supreme Court reiterated that the welfare of the child is the paramount consideration in custody disputes. The court also stated that custody should be given to the parent who can provide the best care and nurturing environment for the child, regardless of the gender of the parent. The court also emphasized that the child’s wishes and preferences must be taken into consideration while deciding custody, particularly in cases involving older children.