Author – Sakshi Sharma, university law college Hazaribagh
Abstract
Menstrual hygiene, though intrinsically linked to women’s health, dignity, and equality, remains overshadowed by entrenched social taboos in India. These taboos not only perpetuate gender discrimination but also impede the effective realization of constitutional guarantees such as equality, dignity, health, and education. This article examines menstrual hygiene through a legal lens, analyzing how social stigma undermines statutory protections, public health policies, and human rights obligations. By evaluating constitutional provisions, statutory frameworks, judicial pronouncements, and international commitments, the article underscores the urgent need to reframe menstrual hygiene as a legal and rights-based issue rather than a private or cultural concern
Menstrual Hygiene and Social Taboos in India: Bridging the Gap Between Law, Health, and Gender Justice
To the Point
Menstruation is a natural biological process, yet in India it is surrounded by silence, stigma, and discrimination. Women and girls are often restricted from religious spaces, kitchens, social gatherings, and even schools during menstruation. These practices, though normalized socially, conflict with constitutional values and statutory protections.
From a legal standpoint, denial of menstrual hygiene management facilities and perpetuation of menstrual taboos directly affect women’s access to education, healthcare, and public participation. Despite progressive constitutional jurisprudence and policy interventions, the implementation gap remains wide due to socio-cultural resistance and lack of legal awareness.
This article critically analyzes menstrual hygiene as an issue of constitutional morality, public health law, gender justice, and human rights, highlighting the role of the judiciary and the State in dismantling menstrual stigma.
Use of Legal Jargon
Menstrual hygiene implicates several legal principles such as:
- Right to Life and Personal Liberty (Article 21)
- Right to Equality and Non-Discrimination (Articles 14 and 15)
- Right to Education (Article 21A)
- Directive Principles of State Policy (Articles 39, 42, and 47)
- International Human Rights Obligations
The continued neglect of menstrual hygiene can be construed as a violation of bodily autonomy, human dignity, and substantive equality. Social taboos operate as informal barriers that result in indirect discrimination, particularly against adolescent girls and women from marginalized communities.
Further, the absence of adequate sanitation and menstrual facilities in schools and workplaces raises concerns of State inaction and failure of positive obligations, which the judiciary has repeatedly emphasized under Article 21.
The Proof
Constitutional Provisions
- Article 21 – Right to Life and Dignity
The Supreme Court has consistently expanded Article 21 to include the right to health, hygiene, and dignity. Menstrual hygiene is inseparable from these rights, as denial of safe menstrual practices compromises both physical and mental well-being.
- Articles 14 and 15 – Equality and Non-Discrimination
Menstrual taboos disproportionately affect women and girls, amounting to gender-based discrimination. Practices excluding menstruating women from public or religious spaces violate the principle of equality before law.
- Article 21A – Right to Education
Lack of menstrual hygiene facilities in schools leads to absenteeism and dropouts among girls, undermining their fundamental right to education.
- Directive Principles of State Policy
Article 39€: Protection of health of women
Article 42: Provision for humane conditions of work and maternity relief
Article 47: Duty of the State to improve public health
Though non-justiciable, these principles guide State policy and legislative action concerning menstrual health.
Statutory and Policy Framework
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 mandates child-friendly infrastructure, which implicitly includes sanitation facilities.
National Health Mission (NHM) incorporates menstrual hygiene management schemes, particularly for rural adolescent girls.
Swachh Bharat Mission emphasizes sanitation, indirectly supporting menstrual hygiene through toilet construction.
Despite these measures, absence of enforceable standards for menstrual facilities weakens implementation.
Case Laws
- Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala (2018) – Sabarimala Case
The Supreme Court held that excluding menstruating women from the Sabarimala temple violated Articles 14, 15, and 25. The judgment rejected biological and social notions of impurity, affirming that menstruation cannot be a valid ground for discrimination. This landmark ruling reinforced constitutional morality over social morality.
- Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardichan (1980)
The Court recognized sanitation as a part of the right to life and held that financial constraints cannot justify State inaction. This case is relevant in emphasizing the State’s obligation to provide hygienic conditions, including menstrual sanitation.
- Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984)
The Court expanded Article 21 to include humane working conditions and health. Menstrual hygiene in workplaces directly falls within this expanded interpretation.
- State of Punjab v. Mohinder Singh Chawla (1997)
The Supreme Court explicitly recognized the right to health as integral to the right to life, thereby strengthening the legal basis for menstrual health as a constitutional concern.
Conclusion
Menstrual hygiene in India is not merely a social or cultural issue—it is a matter of constitutional rights, public health, and gender justice. Persistent social taboos undermine the effective enforcement of legal guarantees enshrined in the Constitution. While judicial pronouncements have challenged discriminatory practices, sustainable change requires proactive legislative action, robust policy implementation, and societal transformation.
The State must recognize menstrual hygiene as a non-negotiable component of human dignity. Legal reforms should aim at codifying minimum standards for menstrual facilities in schools, workplaces, and public institutions. Simultaneously, awareness campaigns and inclusive education must dismantle stigma at the grassroots level.
A rights-based approach to menstrual hygiene is essential to ensure that women and girls can participate equally in social, educational, and economic life without shame or exclusion.
FAQ
Q1. Is menstrual hygiene a fundamental right in India?
While not explicitly mentioned, menstrual hygiene is encompassed within the Right to Life under Article 21, which includes health, dignity, and sanitation.
Q2. Can social taboos around menstruation be legally challenged?
Yes. Practices rooted in menstruation-based discrimination can be challenged under Articles 14, 15, and 21, as demonstrated in the Sabarimala judgment.
Q3. What is the role of the State in menstrual hygiene management?
The State has a positive obligation to provide sanitation infrastructure, affordable menstrual products, and awareness programs under constitutional and policy mandates.
Q4. Are schools legally bound to provide menstrual hygiene facilities?
Indirectly, yes. Under Article 21A and the RTE Act, lack of sanitation that impedes education can amount to a violation of the right to education.
Q5. Why should menstrual hygiene be treated as a legal issue?
Because its neglect results in gender discrimination, health risks, educational deprivation, and violation of human dignity—issues squarely within the domain of law and justice.