Author: Garvita Kathuria, Maharaja Agrasen Institute of Management Studies
LinkedIn Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/garvita-kathuria-883797344?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=ios_app
The discourse on gender justice in India has traditionally been shaped by the need to protect women against historical discrimination and gender-based violence. While these protections remain indispensable, recent judicial observations, evolving social realities and increasing public discourse have prompted a broader constitutional debate on whether the existing legal framework adequately recognises men as potential victims of abuse, harassment and legal vulnerability. Instances involving domestic violence against men, allegations of misuse of protective laws, psychological abuse, matrimonial disputes, mental health concerns and prolonged custody litigation have highlighted gaps in the current legal regime and renewed calls for a more victim-centric approach to justice. This article critically examines the emerging case for recognising men’s rights within India’s constitutional framework by analysing relevant statutes, landmark judicial pronouncements, empirical trends and comparative legal perspectives. It evaluates whether gender-specific protections can coexist with gender-inclusive legal reforms without undermining the objective of safeguarding women against structural inequality. The article argues that recognising men’s rights is not a departure from the pursuit of gender justice but a constitutional necessity rooted in the principles of equality, dignity, fairness and the rule of law. It concludes that a balanced legal framework must ensure effective protection for every victim while preserving the essential safeguards afforded to women, thereby advancing a more inclusive and equitable system of justice.
Keywords: Men’s Rights, Gender Justice, Gender Neutrality, Equality Before Law, Article 14, Constitutional Morality, Domestic Violence, Misuse of Law, Matrimonial Disputes, Victim-Centric Justice, Rule of Law, India.
For decades, the discourse on gender justice in India has primarily focused on protecting and empowering women. This approach is both constitutionally justified and socially necessary, given the historical discrimination, systemic violence and structural inequalities faced by women. Consequently, Parliament enacted several gender-specific legislations, including the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (now substantially reflected under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023), to address gender-based violence and provide effective legal remedies. While these laws have played a significant role in advancing women’s rights, evolving social realities have also brought attention to situations where men emerge as victims of abuse, harassment and legal vulnerability.
In recent years, judicial pronouncements, reported incidents and public discourse have highlighted cases involving domestic violence against men, emotional and psychological abuse, false criminal accusations, coercive matrimonial disputes, cyber harassment and prolonged custody battles. Courts have repeatedly observed that although protective laws remain essential, their misuse in certain cases cannot be overlooked. These developments have shifted the conversation from one exclusively centred on women’s protection to a broader examination of fairness, procedural justice and equal access to legal remedies for all individuals.
The growing discourse on men’s rights is not an attempt to diminish the importance of women’s rights or weaken existing legal protections. Instead, it raises an important constitutional question: whether a legal system founded on the principles of equality, dignity and justice should recognise that victimhood is not confined to a single gender. Despite increasing recognition of the challenges faced by men in certain circumstances, Indian law continues to provide limited statutory remedies for male victims in areas such as domestic violence and sexual offences, compelling them to rely on general criminal provisions that may not adequately address their experiences.
Against this backdrop, the present article examines whether India’s legal framework should evolve towards a more gender-inclusive understanding of victim protection. It analyses recent judicial developments, constitutional principles, empirical data and comparative legal approaches to assess the growing demand for recognising men’s rights within the broader framework of gender justice. While reaffirming the continuing necessity of women-centric laws to address historical and structural disadvantages, the article argues that constitutional equality requires the legal system to remain responsive to every victim of abuse. A truly equitable justice system must ensure that access to protection and justice is determined by the harm suffered rather than by gender alone, thereby strengthening both the rule of law and the constitutional promise of equal justice.
Gender Neutrality: Gender neutrality refers to the principle that legal rights, obligations and protections should apply equally to all individuals, irrespective of their gender. In the context of men’s rights, it advocates for a victim-centric legal framework where access to justice depends on the nature of the harm suffered rather than the gender of the victim or the accused. The concept has gained increasing relevance in discussions surrounding gender-inclusive reforms in criminal and family laws.
Equality Before Law and Equal Protection of Laws: Guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, this principle mandates that every individual is entitled to equal treatment under the law. While reasonable classification is constitutionally permissible, the growing discourse on men’s rights questions whether the absence of statutory remedies for male victims in certain offences aligns with the constitutional promise of equality and equal protection.
Misuse of Law: Misuse of law refers to the abuse of legal provisions through false, frivolous or malicious complaints for purposes other than securing genuine justice. Although protective legislations are indispensable for safeguarding vulnerable groups, courts have repeatedly observed that their misuse in exceptional cases can undermine individual liberty, dilute the credibility of such laws and burden the criminal justice system.
Rule of Law: The Rule of Law is a foundational constitutional principle requiring that all individuals be governed by fair, transparent and impartial legal processes. It demands that justice be administered without arbitrariness and that every victim, irrespective of gender, has meaningful access to legal remedies and procedural safeguards.
Constitutional Morality: Constitutional morality requires that legislative and judicial action be guided by the Constitution’s core values of justice, equality, liberty, dignity and fairness. In the present context, it supports a balanced approach to gender justice by encouraging legal reforms that recognise evolving social realities while ensuring that the constitutional rights of every individual are adequately protected.
The growing discussion around recognising men’s rights in India appears to be driven by a combination of social, legal and psychological factors that have become more visible in recent years. One of the primary reasons is the changing nature of family relationships and the increasing number of disputes arising from marriage, separation, maintenance and custody matters. As these conflicts become more complex, men are often left without adequate institutional support, especially when allegations are made in emotionally charged situations.
Another important reason is the perception that some legal provisions, though originally designed to protect vulnerable groups, may sometimes be invoked in ways that create fear of misuse. This does not mean that such laws are unnecessary or ineffective in general; rather, it reflects the concern that in certain cases, the absence of immediate safeguards can lead to prolonged harassment, social stigma and financial strain for the accused. The fear of being presumed guilty before a fair inquiry has contributed significantly to the demand for a more balanced and gender-neutral approach.
Mental health pressures also play a major role in this conversation. A large number of men in India continue to face expectations of being the primary earners, emotional providers and decision-makers within the family. When they encounter marital breakdown, false allegations, or prolonged litigation, they may experience severe stress, isolation and helplessness. In many cases, these pressures remain unspoken because men are less likely to seek help or report emotional distress due to social conditioning.
At the same time, public awareness has increased through media reports, social media discussions and personal testimonies that highlight the difficulties faced by men in family and criminal disputes. These narratives have encouraged a broader debate on whether the legal system is sufficiently responsive to all victims, regardless of gender.
These developments do not suggest that women-centric laws are unnecessary. On the contrary, such laws remain essential in addressing historical inequality and continuing violence against women. However, they do indicate that gender justice is no longer being viewed through a single lens. The reasons behind the growing call for men’s rights lie in the need for fairness, procedural balance emotional support and a legal framework that recognises the vulnerabilities of every individual.
1. Atul Subhash Suicide Case (2024–Present)
This case emerged after Atul Subhash, a Bengaluru-based software engineer, died by suicide in December 2024, leaving behind a suicide note and video alleging prolonged mental harassment through matrimonial proceedings. The incident sparked nationwide debate on men’s mental health, the misuse of matrimonial laws, and the need for greater legal protection for male victims. During the proceedings, the Karnataka High Court observed that if a husband is driven to suicide due to persistent harassment by his wife, such allegations may require examination under the offence of abetment of suicide. Although the matter is still pending adjudication, it has become a significant reference point in the evolving discourse on recognising men’s rights and the need for a more gender-inclusive approach to justice.
2. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273
The Supreme Court acknowledged that Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, though enacted to protect married women from cruelty, had been misused in certain cases, leading to unnecessary arrests. The Court directed police authorities to strictly comply with the arrest guidelines under Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and held that arrest should not be automatic merely because an offence is alleged. The judgment reinforced the principles of personal liberty and due process while ensuring that genuine complaints continue to receive legal protection.
3. Rajesh Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2017) 8 SCC 821
Expressing concern over the misuse of Section 498A IPC in matrimonial disputes, the Supreme Court observed that frivolous complaints could adversely affect innocent individuals and their families. To prevent abuse of the provision, the Court initially introduced procedural safeguards, including the constitution of Family Welfare Committees to scrutinise complaints before coercive action. Although these directions were subsequently modified, the judgment remains significant for recognising the possibility of misuse of protective legislation.
4. Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India (2018) 10 SCC 443
The Supreme Court partly modified the directions issued in Rajesh Sharma, holding that courts cannot create procedural mechanisms beyond the statutory framework. However, it reaffirmed that while Section 498A serves an important protective purpose, allegations of its misuse cannot be ignored. The Court emphasised that both the rights of genuine victims and the procedural rights of the accused must be preserved.
5. Ajay v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. (Delhi High Court, 2025)
While quashing an FIR under Section 498A IPC, the Delhi High Court observed that although the provision was enacted to protect married women from cruelty, it has, in certain cases, been misused to harass husbands and their family members or gain leverage in matrimonial disputes. At the same time, the Court cautioned that such observations should not undermine the protection available to genuine victims of domestic violence. The judgment highlights the need to strike a balance between safeguarding women and preventing the misuse of criminal law through vague or unfounded allegations.
The discourse on recognising men’s rights in India should not be perceived as an attempt to undermine the progress achieved through women’s rights movements, but rather as an extension of the constitutional commitment to equality, dignity and justice for every individual. While women continue to face disproportionate levels of violence, discrimination and structural disadvantage, changing social realities reveal that men, too, may become victims of domestic abuse, psychological harassment, false accusations, coercive matrimonial disputes and institutional neglect. A justice system founded on constitutional principles cannot overlook such experiences merely because they do not conform to traditional perceptions of victimhood. Recent judicial observations, increasing public discourse and empirical trends have highlighted the need for a more balanced, victim-centric approach that safeguards genuine victims while preventing the misuse of legal processes and preserving due process for the accused. The objective is not to replace or weaken women-centric protections, which remain indispensable, but to ensure that legal remedies evolve in a manner that is fair, inclusive and responsive to the realities faced by all individuals. Strengthening procedural safeguards, promoting mental health and counselling support and considering gender-inclusive reforms in appropriate areas of law can contribute to a more equitable legal framework. Ultimately, the true essence of gender justice lies in ensuring that protection is determined by the harm suffered rather than by gender alone, thereby reinforcing the constitutional ideals of equality before law, equal protection of laws and justice for all.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Q1. Does Indian law specifically recognise men’s rights?
While the Constitution guarantees fundamental rights to every individual irrespective of gender, several statutory protections relating to domestic violence and certain sexual offences remain gender-specific. Consequently, men often have to rely on general criminal laws, constitutional remedies or civil proceedings rather than dedicated legislation.
Q2. Can men be victims of domestic violence in India?
Yes. Men may experience physical, emotional, psychological, verbal or economic abuse within domestic relationships. However, unlike women, they are not entitled to seek relief under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and must pursue remedies under other applicable legal provisions depending on the facts of the case.
Q3. Have Indian courts recognised the misuse of protective laws?
Yes. The Supreme Court, in cases such as Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Rajesh Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh, acknowledged that certain protective provisions may be misused in exceptional circumstances and emphasised the need to balance victim protection with procedural safeguards and the rights of the accused.
Q4. Does recognising men’s rights weaken women’s rights?
No. The recognition of men’s rights is not intended to dilute the protections available to women. Rather, it seeks to promote a victim-centric approach that ensures justice, fairness and access to legal remedies for every individual while preserving the safeguards necessary to protect women against gender-based violence.
Q5. Should India adopt gender-neutral laws?
Many legal experts and policymakers support the introduction of gender-neutral provisions in appropriate areas, particularly concerning domestic violence and sexual offences. Such reforms aim to protect all victims without compromising the objectives of existing women-centric legislation.
Q6. Why is the debate on men’s rights gaining importance in India?
The discussion has gained momentum due to increasing judicial observations on the misuse of certain laws, concerns relating to men’s mental health, rising matrimonial disputes, public awareness and growing calls for a legal framework that upholds constitutional principles of equality, fairness, and equal protection for all individuals.
