Gender Justice : The Constitutional Perspectives And The Judicial Approach

Dr. Alok chantia, Assistant Professor ( Anthropology ) , &president AIRO,

JNPG College, Lucknow , U.P. India
Gender inequities throughout the world are among the most all-pervasive forms of inequality.
Gender equality concerns each and every member of the society and forms the very basis of a
just society and hence, the issue of gender justice is of enormous magnitude and of
mammoth ramification engulfing an all-embracing and illimitable canvas. In the midnight of
August 15, 1947, when India awoke to life and freedom, most of its 170 million women
scarcely knew what the Tryst with Destiny was all about. Victims of poverty, ignorance and
oppressive social institutions, they hardly knew their destiny and who controlled it. However,
the stalwarts who led India to its independence were aware that if the new India of their
dreams was to become a reality and not remain only a figment of imagination, it would need
social engineering on a massive scale, in respect of the backward and oppressed sections of
the society and above all, its women. Swami Vivekanand had aptly remarked :
Just as a bird could not fly with one wing only, a nation would not march forward if the
women are left behind.
Being conscious of the need of the time, the framers and founding fathers of our
compassionate Constitution incorporated certain sacrosanct ideals in the form of
comprehensive rights for women so as to metamorphose the abstract ideals into a concrete
form, which would enable the upliftment of the status of women in the male-dominated
chauvinistic society.
The crucial question that arises for deliberation is : Have the women been able to reap the
benefits provided for them under the Constitution of India? The answer, unfortunately, is not
encouraging. There is still a long way to go to achieve the goals enshrined in the Constitution.
In spite of special constitutional guarantees and other legislations, crimes against women in
the form of child marriages, rape, dowry, practice of Sati, trafficking of the girl child,
prostutition, domestic violence and sexual harassment are on the increase. The review of the
disabilities and constraints on women, which stem from socio-cultural institutions, indicates
that the majority of women are still very far from enjoying the rights and opportunities
guaranteed to them by the Constitution. Justice K. Ramaswamy has also stated :
Indian women have suffered and are suffering discrimination in silence. Self sacrifice and
self-denial are their nobility and fortitude and yet they have been subjected to all inequities,
indignities, inequality and discrimination. [1-2]
It is indeed ironical that when Indian mythology places women on a very high pedestal and
they are worshipped and honoured Goddess of learning is Saraswati, of wealth
Laxmi, of power Parvati and of energy or Shakti Durga we show no concern
for her honour and her dignity. It is a sorry reflection mirroring the attitude of indifference of
the society which results in a total negation of the human rights of women in which gender
justice nosedives.
Despite this regression in the social and moral values, there is still a ray of hope in the midst
of the darkness surrounding the realization of womens rights. Time and again the Indian
judiciary has played a pro-active role by their positive interpretation of the various

Constitutional provisions for women upholding, the validity of various legislations and laying
down exhaustive guidelines to realize the concept of gender justice and gender equality.
The Apex Court of our country has observed that democracy, development and respect for
human rights and fundamental freedoms are inter-dependent and have mutual reinforcement.
The human rights for women, including the girl child, are therefore, an inalienable, integral
and indivisible part of universal human rights. All forms of discrimination on the grounds of
gender is violative of fundamental freedoms or human rights.[3] In this way, the judiciary has
laid down exhaustive guidelines in its various decisions to realize the concept of gender
justice and gender equality.
Constitutional Safeguards for Women and the Liberal Interpretation of these
provisions by the Judiciary :
Our Constitution, the fountainhead of all laws and the Organic law of the land, recognizes
equality of the sexes and prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. It also provides
legislation to be made to confer more rights on women by making special provisions. It has to
be borne in mind that in the absence of equality of gender, human rights remain in the
inaccessible realm. In most of the nations, women are ascribed a secondary role. This
secondary role has to be metamorphosed to the primary one to bring women at an equal
stratum with men. To achieve so, a different outlook in law has to be perceived. For this
reason, various provisions have been engrafted in our Constitution.
The Preamble of the Constitution is a key to open the mind of the makers of the constitution
which may show the general purposes for which they made the Constitution.[4] It declares
the rights and freedoms which the people of India intended to secure to all citizens.[5] The
Preamble begins with the words We, the People of India........... which includes men and
women of all castes, religions, etc. It wishes to render Equality of status and of opportunity
to every man and woman. The Preamble again assures dignity of individuals which
includes the dignity of women. On the basis of the Preamble, several important enactments
have been brought into operation, pertaining to every walk of life family, succession,
guardianship and employment which aim at providing and protecting the status, rights and
dignity of women.
Fundamental Rights Guaranteed to women under the Constitution :
Part III of the Constitution, consisting of Articles 12 to 35, relating to Fundamental Rights, is
considered the heart of the Constitution. The fundamental rights are regarded as
fundamental because they are most essential for the attainment by the individual of his full
intellectual, moral and spiritual status. As per Justice P. N. Bhagwati :
These fundamental rights represent the basic values cherished by the people of this country
since the Vedic times and they are calculated to protect the dignity of the individual and
create conditions in which every human being can develop his personality to the fullest
extent.[6]
Article 14 Equality before Law :
Article 14 guarantees to every person the right to equality before the law or the equal
protection of the laws within the territory of India. The first expression equality before law
which is taken from the English Common Law, is a declaration of equality of all persons

within the territory of India, implying thereby the absence of any special privilege in favour
of any individual. The second expression, the equal protection of the laws is the essence and
core of the right to equality under which the State is under an obligation to take necessary
steps so that every individual, man and woman alike, is given equal respect which he or she is
entitled to as a human being. This provision is based on the last clause of the first section of
the Fourteenth Amendment to the American Constitution and directs that equal protection
shall be secured to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction of the Union in the enjoyment
of their rights and privileges without favouritism or discrimination. It is, therefore, said that
the equal protection of the laws is a pledge of protection or guarantee of equal laws.
Though Article 14 permits reasonable classification, yet classification based on sex is not
permissible.[7] In the case of AIR India v. Nergesh Meerza[8], the Apex Court, while dealing
with the fixation of different ages of retirement for male and female employees and the
provision preventing the female employees from having child, expressed the view to the
effect that the retirement of air hostesses in the event of marriage taking place within four
years of service does not suffer from any irregularity or arbitrariness but retirement of air
hostesses on first pregnancy is unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the
Constitution. It was considered that such a provision was callous, cruel and an insult to
Indian womanhood. Therefore, such disability violates the equal protection of law and
opportunity which is the cornerstone of our Constitution and legal system.
Payment of equal pay for equal work has also been justified under Article 14. Unequal pay
for materially equal work cannot be justified on the basis of an artificial classification
between the two kinds of work and employment.[9] In the case of Mackinnon Mackenzie and
Co. Ltd. v. Andrey (D) Casta[10], the question involved was getting of equal pay for equal
work. Their Lordships ruled that when lady stenographers and male stenographers were not
getting equal remuneration, that was discriminatory and any settlement in that regard did not
save the situation. Their Lordships also expressed the view that discrimination between male
stenographers and lady stenographers was only on the ground of sex and that being not
permissible, the employer was bound to pay the same remuneration to both of them when
they were doing practically the same kind of work. In Madhu Kishwar v. State of Bihar,[11]
the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 was challenged on the ground that the Act denied the
right to succession to scheduled tribe women to the tenancy lands and hence, it violates
Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court, by admitting the petition,
quashed the discriminative provisions of the Act and paved a way for tribal women to entitle
their rights to tenancy lands along with men.
Article 14 has also been invoked to prohibit sexual harassment of working women on the
ground of violation of the right of gender equality.[12] Article 14 indeed contains important
provisions for protecting the rights of women and the interpretation of this Article by the
judiciary enables the establishment of equality between the sexes.
Article 15 Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex :
Article 14 embodies the general principle of equality before the law. A specific application of
the same principle is provided in Article 15. Article 15 concretises and enlarges the scope of
Article 14. Article 15 (1) prohibits the State from discrimination on the grounds of religion,
race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them. In other words, all laws are to be applied to
members of both sexes equally, and there is an express prohibition of discrimination on the
ground of sex. The right guaranteed in this clause of Article 15 is conferred on a citizen as an

individual and is available against his being subjected to discrimination in the matter of
rights, privileges and immunities pertaining to him as a citizen generally. A law which
deprived a female proprietress to hold and enjoy her property on the ground of her sex was
held violative of Article 15.[13]
Article 15(2) provides that no citizen shall, on the grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex,
place of birth or any of them, be subjected to any disability, liability, restriction or condition
with regard to (a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public
entertainment, or (b) the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort,
maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.
Thus, by incorporating Articles 14 and 15, the status of women has been uplifted and a new
life of equal rights at par with men has been accorded to them.
However, the provisions of non-discrimination on this account do not prevent the State from
making any special provisions for women and children. The same has been laid down in
Article 15 (3), which empowers the State to make special provisions for them. Thus it would
be no violation of Article 15 if institutions are set up by the State exclusively for women or
places are reserved for women at public entertainments or in public conveyances. The main
object of Article 15 (3) is based on protective discrimination keeping in view the weak
physical position of women. The reason is that womens physical structure and the
performance of maternal functions place her at a disadvantaged position in the struggle for
subsistence, and her physical well-being becomes an object of public interest and care in
order to preserve the strength and vigour of the race.[14] This provision has enabled the
State to make special statutory provisions exclusively for the welfare of women. In the case
of Dattatraya v. State of Bombay[15], the Bombay High Court held that the State can
establish educational institutions for women only. Again in Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of
Bombay[16], the validity of Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code was challenged under
Articles 14 and 15 (1) of the Constitution. Section 497 of the IPC deals with the provisions of
relating to the offence of adultery, which only punishes man for adultery and exempts the
woman from punishment though she may be equally guilty as an abettor. This section was
held by the Supreme Court to be valid since the classification was not based on the ground of
sex alone. The Court upheld the Section 497 of the IPC as valid by relying upon the mandate
of Article 15 (3) of the Constitution. Even Section 354 of the IPC is not invalid because it
protects the modesty only of women and Section 488 (now Section 125) of the Cr. PC. (Code
of Criminal Procedure) is valid although it obliges the husband to maintain his wife but not
vice versa.[17] Similarly, Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 converting the
womens limited ownership of property into full ownership has been found in pursuance of
Article 15 (3).[18]
When the matter relating to mother as natural guardian was questioned, the Supreme Court
held that relegation of mother to inferior position to act as a natural guradian is violation of
Articles 14 and 15 and hence, the father cannot claim that he is the only natural guradian. The
guardianship right of women has undergone a sea change by this interpretation given by the
Apex Court.[19]
The scope of Article 15 (3) is wide enough to cover any special provision for women
including reservation in jobs. Article 16 does not come in the way of such reservation. The
two articles must be harmoniously construed. Women are a weaker section of our society for
whose upliftment Article 15 (3) is made which should be given widest possible interpretation
and application subject to the condition that reservation should not exceed 50% limit as laid

down in the case of Indra Sawhney v. Union of India.[20] The Court has also upheld an
Orissa Government Order reserving 30% quota for women in the allotment of 24 hours
medical stores as part of self-employment scheme.[21] Thus, the language of Article 15 (3)
is in absolute terms and does not appear to restrict in any way the nature or ambit of special
provisions which the State may make in favour of women or children.
Article 16 Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment :
Article 16 is an instance of the application of the general rule of equality before law laid
down in Article 14 and of the prohibition of discrimination in Article 15(1) with respect to
the opportunity for employment or appointment to any office under the State. Explaining the
relative scope of Articles 14, 15 and 16, Das, J. said :
Article 14 guarantees the general right of equality; Articles 15 and 16 are instances of the
same right in favour of citizens in some special circumstances.[22]
Article 16(1) and (2) embody the general rule that the State shall provide equal opportunities
for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the
State. There shall be no discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, place of
birth, residence or any of them in providing employment. These provisions are an extension
of the principle of equality before law and of the goal of equality of status and opportunity
as set in the Preamble of the Constitution. The import of these provisions is that a woman has
the same rights in matters of employment under the State as a man and the State shall not
discriminate against women on this count. It operates equally against any such discriminative
legislation or discriminative executive action. If any law is passed or any executive action is
taken to prevent the women from taking up employment under the State, such law or
executive action could be challenged under Articles 16 (1) and (2). The principle of equal pay
for equal work is also covered by equality of opportunity in Article 16 (1).[23] Difference in
the pay scales and promotional avenues between male and female employees is also
prohibited by Article 16 (2).[24]
In the case of Miss C. B. Muthamma, IFS v. Union of India and others,[25] the constitutional
validity of Rule 8(2) of the Indian Foreign Service (Conduct and Discipline) Rules, 1961 and
Rule 18 (4) of the Indian Foreign Service (Recruitment, Cadre, Seniority and Promotion)
Rules, 1961 was challenged before the Supreme Court. The impugned provision Rule 8 (2)
requires a woman member of the service to obtain permission of the Government in writing
before her marriage is solemnized and at any time after the marriage, a woman member of
her service may be required to resign from the service, if the Government is satisfied that her
family and domestic commitments are likely to come in the way of the due and efficient
discharge of her duties as a member of the service. Further, Rule 18 (4) also runs in the same
prejudicial strain, which provides that no married woman shall be entitled as a right to be
appointed to the service. The petitioner complained that under the guise of these rules, she
had been harassed and was shown hostile discrimination by the Chairman, UPSC from the
joining stage to the stage of promotion. The Honble Supreme Court held that these Rules are
in defiance of Article 14, 16 and 21 and Krishna Iyer, J. pronounced :
That, our founding faith enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 should have been tragically ignored
vis-a-vis half of Indias humanity, viz; our women, is a sad reflection on the distance between
the Constitution in the book and the law in action.[26]

In the case of T. Sudhakar Reddy v. Government of Andhra Pradesh,[27] the petitioner

challenged the validity of Section 31 (1)(a) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies
Act, 1964 and Rule 22 C,. 22 A (3)(a) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Rules
1964. These provisions provide for nomination of two women members by the Registrar to
the Managing Committee of the Co-operative Societies, with a right to vote and to take part
in the meetings of the committee. The Andhra Pradesh High Court quashed the petition and
upheld these provisions in the interest of womens participation in co-operative societies and
opined that it will be in the interest of the economic development of the country. In
Government of Andhra Pradesh v. P.B. Vijaya Kumar,[28] the legislation made by the State
of Andhra Pradesh providing 30% reservation of seats for women in local bodies and in
educational institutions was held valid by the Supreme Court and the power conferred upon
the State under Article 15 (3) is so wide which would cover the powers to make the special
legal provisions for women in respect of employment or education.
This exclusive power is an integral part of Article 15(3) and thereby, does not override
Article 16 of the Constitution.
At this juncture, it is also noteworthy to mention the case of Associate Banks Officers
Association v. State Bank of India,[29] wherein the Apex Court held that women workers
are in no way inferior to their male counterparts, and hence there should be no discrimination
on the ground of sex against women. Recently, in Air India Cabin Crew Association v.
Yeshaswinee Merchant,[30] the Supreme Court has held that the twin Articles 15 and 16
prohibit a discriminatory treatment but not preferential or special treatment of women, which
is a positive measure in their favour. The Constitution does not prohibit the employer to
consider sex while making the employment decisions where this is done pursuant to a
properly or legally chartered affirmative action plan. Further, in Vijay Lakshmi v. Punjab
University,[31] it has been observed that Rules 5 and 8 of the Punjab University Calendar,
Vol. III providing for appointment of a lady principal in a womens or a lady teacher therein
cannot be held to be violative of either Article 14 or Article 16 of the Constitution, because
the classification is reasonable and it has a nexus with the object sought to be achieved. In
addition, the State Government is empowered to make such special provisions under Article
15(3) of the Constitution. This power is not restricted in any manner by Article 16. In this
way, the Indian Judiciary has played a positive role in preserving the rights of women in the
society.
Article 19 (1)(g) Freedom of Trade and Occupation :
Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution guarantees that all citizens have the right to practise any
profession or to carry on any occupation or trade or business. The right under Article 19
(1)(g) must be exercised consistently with human dignity. Therefore, sexual harassment in the
exercise of this right at the work place amounts to its violation. In the case of Delhi Domestic
Working Womens Forum v. Union of India[32] relating to rape and violence of working
women, the Court called for protection to the victims and provision of appropriate legal
representation and assistance to the complainants of sexual assault cases at the police station
and in Courts. To realize the concept of gender equality, the Supreme Court has laid down
exhaustive guidelines in the case of Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan[33] to prevent sexual
harassment of working women at their workplace. The Court held that it is the duty of the
employer or other responsible person to prevent sexual harassment of working women and to
ensure that there is no hostile environment towards women at their working place. These
guidelines were framed to protect the rights of working women to work with dignity under

Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. Their Lordship also observed :

Each incident of sexual harassment of women at workplace results in violation of
fundamental rights of Gender Equality and the Right to Life and Liberty.[34]
Article 21 Protection of life and personal liberty.
Article 21 contains provisions for protection of life and personal liberty of persons. It states :
No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure
established by law.
This short one sentence in which Article 21 has been couched has made long strides due to
the judicial interpetation received at the deft hands of judges of the Apex Court. Article 21,
though couched in negative language, confer on every person the fundamental right to life
and personal liberty and it has been given a positive effect by judicial interpretation. Life,
in Article 21, is not merely the physical act of breathing. This has been recognized by the
Courts. The Rig Veda[35] gives a subtle description of the mundane activity of speech. The
soul (which, in the Rig Veda, is compared to a bird soaring high in the heavens) inspires or
fills up the mind with speech. The Gandharva (the mind) carries it to the heart; and then,
the luminous inspired speech takes shape in words that can be heard. One can pursue this
imagery further. While the external mundane activities of life have their own place, they are
the manifestations of an inner, unseen, unperceived activity which, indeed is the real life
that a human being lives, it is true that judicial decisions on Article 21 do not embark upon
such an analysis in depth. But the judiciary does take note to deal with the wide approach of
the right to life.
In view of the global developments in the sphere of human rights the judicial decisions from
time to time have played a vital role towards the recognition of an affirmative right to basic
necessities of life under Article 21. In the case of State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan
Mandikar,[36] the Supreme Court has held that even a woman of easy virtue is entitled to
privacy and no one can invade her privacy as and when he likes. This article has also been
invoked for the upliftment of and dignified life for the prostitutes. The Supreme Court has
placed emphasis on the need to provide to prostitute opportunities for education and training
so as to facilitate their rehabilitation.[37] Sexual harassment at workplace is a violation of
Article 21 of the Constitution and hence, the Apex Court of the Country, in the case of
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan,[38] has laid down detailed direction and guidelines on the
subject which are to be strictly observed by all employers, public or private. Right to life is
recognized as a basic human right. It has to be read in consonance with the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against
Women and the Declaration and Covenants of Civil and Political Rights and the Covenants
of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to which India is a party having ratified them. The
right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution also includes the right to live with
human dignity and rape violates this right of women.[39]
Article 23 Right against exploitation and prohibition of traffic in human beings
For centuries women have been humiliated, exploited, tortured and harassed in all walks of
life physically, mentally and sexually. To safeguard and protect women against
exploitation, Article 23 (1) of the Constitution of India prohibits traffic in human beings and
begar and other similar forms of forced labour. Traffic in human beings means selling and

buying human beings as slaves and also includes immoral traffic in women and children for
immoral or other purposes.[40] To curb the deep rooted social evil of prostitution and to give
effect to this Article, the Parliament has passed The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act,
1956.[41] This Act protects the individuals, both men and women, not only against the acts of
the State but also against the acts of private individuals and imposes a positive obligation on
the State to take all measures to abolish these evil practices. another evil practice of the
Devadasi system, in which women are dedicated as devadasis to the deities and temples, was
abolished by the State of Andhra Pradesh by enacting the Devadasis (Prohibition of
Dedication) Act, 1988. The Supreme Court has also held that traffic in human beings includes
devadasis and speedy and effective legal action should be taken against brothel keepers.[42]
Similar evil practices are prevalent in India such as selling the female infants and girls to
foreigners under the guise of inter-country adoption and marriages. The Supreme Court
accepted a letter as a writ petition,[43] complaining of mal-practices indulged by nongovernment organizations and orphanages engaged in the work of offering Indian children,
more specifically, female infants, in adoption to foreign parents. The Courts observed that in
the guise of adoption, Indian children of tender age were not only exposed to the long
dreadful journey to distant foreign countries at great risk to their lives, but in case they
survive, they were not provided proper care and shelter and were employed as slaves and in
the course of time they become beggars or prostitutes for want of proper care and livelihood.
As there are no specific legislative provisions to regulate Inter-country adoptions, the Court
laid down certain principles and norms which should be followed in determining whether
a child should be allowed to be adopted by foreign parents. Further a direction was given to
the Government to enact a law regulating inter-country adoptions, as it is their constitutional
obligation under Articles 15 (3), 23, 24 and 39 (c) and (f) of the Constitution.
The Role of Directive Principles of State Policy in Protecting the Rights of Women.
Part IV of the Constitution from Articles, 3 to 51 contains what may be described as the
active obligation of the State. The Directive Principles of State Policy are fundamental in the
governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State of apply these principles in
making laws an to secure a social order in which social, economic and political justice shall
inform all the institutions of national life. These Directives Principles are ideals which are
based on the concept of Welfare State and they fix certain goals; social and economic; for
immediate attainment by the Union and State Governments while formulating a policy or
enacting a law.
According to Article 39(a), the State shall direct its policy towards securing that the citizens
men and women equally, have the right to an adequate means of livelihood.[44] Under
Article 39 (d), the State shall direct its policy towards securing equal pay for equal work for
both men and women.[45] This Article draws its support from Articles 14 and 16 and its
main objective is the building of a welfare society and an equalitarian social order in the
Indian Union. To give effect to this Article, the Parliament has enacted the Equal
Remuneration Act, 1976 which provides for payment of equal remuneration to men and
women workers and prevents discrimination on the ground of sex. Further Article 39 (e) is
aimed at protecting the health and strength of workers, both men and women.
A very important and useful provision for womens welfare and well-being is incorporated
under Article 42 of the Constitution. It imposes an obligation upon the State to make
provisions for securing just and humane conditions of work and for maternity relief. Some of

the legislations which promoted the objectives of this Article are the Workmens
Compensation Act, 1923, the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, the Minimum Wages
Act, 1948, the Maternity Benefit Act 1961, the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, and the like. In
the case of Dattatraya v. State of Bombay,[46] the Court held that legal provisions to give
special maternity relief to women workers under Article 42 of the Constitution does not
infringe Article 15 (1). Recently, in the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female
Workers (Muster Roll),[47] the Supreme Court held that the benefits under the Maternity
Benefits Act, 1961 extend to employees of the Municipal Corporation who are casual
workers or workers employed on daily wages basis. Upholding, the claim of non-regularized
female workers for maternity relief, the Court has stated :
Since Article 42 specifically speaks of just and humane conditions of work, and maternity
relief, the validity of an executive or administrative action in denying maternity benefit has to
be examined on the anvil of Article 42 which though not enforceable at law, is nevertheless
available for determining the legal efficacy of the action complained of.[48]
Article 44 provides that the State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens, a Uniform Civil
Code, throughout the territory of India. India comprises of diverse religions, faith and beliefs
and each of these religious denominations are governed by their distinct personal laws which
vary from one another. In matters relating to marriage, divorce, adoption, maintenance and
succession, different personal laws have treated and placed women on different levels. Due to
these variations, people are being tempted to convert from one religion to another in order to
seek the benefit under the guise of those personal laws. Placing , reliance on Article 44 by the
Supreme Court in upholding the right of maintenance of a Muslim divorce under Section 125
of the Criminal Procedure Code has boomeranged resulting in a separate law of maintenance
for Muslim female divorcee.[49] Later the Court again reminded the State of its obligation
under this Article and issued direction to it to take appropriate steps for its implementation
and inform the Court of these steps. In the case of Sarla Mundgal v. Union of India, [50] a
Hindu husband married under Hindu Law and again married the second time by converting
himself to Islam. As the State had not yet made any efforts to legislate the Uniform Civil
Code, the Supreme Court directed the Government to report the measures taken for the
implementation of Article 44 of the Constitution in the interest of unity and integrity and for
the welfare and benefit of women.
Fundamental Duties towards woman enshrined in the Constitution :
Article 51-A under Part IV-A of the Constitution of India lays down certain Fundamental
Duties upon every citizen of India, which were added by the Forty-Second Amendment of the
Constitution in 1976. The later part of Clause (e) of Article 51-A, which relates to women,
gives a mandate and imposes a duty on Indian citizens to renounce practices derogatory to
the dignity of women. The duties under Article 51-A are obligatory on citizens, but it
should be invoked by the Courts while deciding cases and also should be observed by the
State while making statutes and executing laws.
Reservation of Seats for Women in Election to Local Bodies :
The Parliament has succeeded in its efforts to provide for reservation of seats for women in
election to the Panchayat and the Municipalities. Reservation of seats for women in
Panchayats and Municipalities have been provided in Articles 243 D and 243 T of the
Constitution of India. Part IX and IX A have been added to the Constitution by the 73rd and

74th Amendment Acts with Articles 243, 243 A to 243 D and Articles 243 P 243 ZG[51].
According to Article 243 D(3), not less than one-third, (including the number of seats
reserved for women belonging to the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes) of the total
number of seats to be filled up by direct election in every Panchayat, shall be reserved for
women and such seats may be allotted by rotation to different constituencies in a Panchayat.
Article 243 T (3) of the Constitution provides similar provisions for reservation of seats for
women in direct election in every Municipality. Therefore, reservation of 33% of seats for
women candidates to hold office and perform all public functions at the Panchayat and
Municipal level is within the constitutional mandate.
As an extension the 73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution, the Constitution (81st
Amendment) Bill was introduced in the Parliament way back in 1996 to reserve one-third of
seats for women in the Lok Sabha and the State Assemblies. However, this bill has not yet
been brought in to shape due to political overtures.
Conclusion
The issue of gender justice has been gaining ground in many an area for some centuries.
Though the traditional view of gender injustice has been given quite a quietus and treated as
an event of bygone days, yet the malady still remains, sometimes pouncing with ungenerous
monstrosity giving a free play to the inferior endowments of nature in man thereby making
the whole concept a ridicule anaesthetizing the entire edifice built in the last few decades.
The ruthless exploitation of women not only exhibits how such treatment in an anathema to
the concept of gender justice but also exposes the burial of the idea that is required to be
nurtured, cherished and believed with a deep conviction and maintained with a sanguine
resolve.
It is realized that despite the constitutional safeguard and the active judicial support towards
the cause of women, changes in social attitudes and institutions cannot be brought about very
rapidly. However, it is necessary to accelerate this process of change by deliberate and
planned efforts so that the pernicious social evil of gender inequality is buried deep in its
grave. Laws written in black and white are not enough to combat the evil. The role of Courts
and judges assume greater importance and it is expected that the Courts would deal with
cases relating to woman in a more realistic manner. A socially sensitive judge is indeed a
better statutory armour in cases of crimes against women than the long clauses of penal
provisions, containing complex exceptions and provisos.
Awakening of the collective consciousness is the need of the day. A problem as multifaceted
as womens self-actualization is too important to be left to a single section of the society.
This responsibility has to be shared by the State, community organizations, legislators who
frame the laws and the judiciary which interprets the Cnstitution and other laws in order to
give a fillip to the legal reform in the field of gender justice and to usher in the new dawn of
freedom, dignity and opportunity for both the sexes equally.

1-2. Madhu Kishwar v. State of Bihar, AIR 1996 SC 1864.

3. Valsamma Paul v. Cochin University and others, AIR 1996 SC 1011.
4. Berubari Union and Exchange of Enclaves, Re, AIR 1960 SC 845, 856.

5. Sir Alladi Krishnaswami, Constituent Assembly Debates, Vol. 10, 41.

6. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597.
7. Chitra Ghosh v. Union of India, AIR 1970 SC 35.
8. AIR 1981 SC 1829 : 1981 Lab IC 1313.
9. State of M.P. v. Pramod Bhartiya, AIR 1993 SC 286.
10. AIR 1987 SC 1281 : 1987 Lab IC 961.
11. AIR 1996 SC 1864.
12. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011; Apparel Export Promotion Council v.
A. K. Chopra, AIR 1999 SC 625.
13. A Cracknell v. State, AIR 1952 All 746.
14. Muller v. Oregon, 52 L.Ed. 551.
15. AIR 1952 SC 181 : 1952 SCR 612.
16. AIR 1954 SC 321 : 1954 Cri LJ 886.
17. Shahdad v. Mohd. Abdullah, AIR 1967 J & K 120; Girdhar Gopal v. State, AIR 1953
MB 147; Thamsi Goundan v. Kanni Ammal, AIR 1952 Mad 529.
18. Thota Sesharathamma v. Thota Manikyamma, (1991) 4 SCC 312.
19. Mrs. Gita Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India with Dr. Vandana Shiva v. Jayanta
Bandhopadhyaya, AIR 1999 SC 1149.
20. AIR 1992 SC 477.
21. Gayatri Devi Pansari v. State of Orissa, AIR 2000 SC 1531.
22. Gazula Dasaratha Rama Rao v. State of A. P., AIR 1961 SC 564.
23. Randhir Singh v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 879.
24. Uttarkhand Mahila Kalyan Parishad v. State of U. P., AIR 1992 SC 1695.
25. AIR 1979 SC 1868.
26. Id. at p. 1870.
27. AIR 1994 SC 544
28. AIR 1995 SC 1648.
29. AIR 1998 SC 32.
30. AIR 2004 SC 187
31. AIR 2003 SC 3331.
32. (1995) 1 SCC 14.
33. AIR 1997 SC 3011.
34. AIR 1997 SC 3011.
35. 10.177.2.
36. AIR 1991 SC 207, 211.
37. Gaurav Jain v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 3021.
38. AIR 1997 SC 3011.
39. Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty, AIR 1996 SC 922; Chairman, Railway
Board v. Chandrima Das, AIR 2000 SC 988.
40. Raj Bahadur Singh v. Legal Remem-brancer, AIR 1953 Cal 522.
41. Formerly known as the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956.
42. Vishal Jeet v. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1412.
43. Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 469.
44. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180.
45. Randhir Singh v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 879; Mackinnon Mackenzie and Co. Ltd.
v. Andrey DKosta, AIR 1987 SC 1281; State of M.P. v. Pramod Bhartiya, AIR 1993 SC
286.
46. AIR 1952 SC 181 : 1952 Cri LJ 955.
47. AIR 2000 SC 1274.
48. Id. At p. 1277.

49. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, AIR 1985 SC 945, 954 : 1985 Cri LJ 875 and
the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.
50. AIR 1995 SC 1531.
51. The Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment) Act, 1992 and the Constitution Seventyfourth Amendment Act 1992 popularly known as the Panchayat Raj and Nagarpalika
Constitution Amendment Acts.