Author: Arjun Singh, Invertis University, Bareilly
To the Point
Every Indian citizen is equal before the law, according to the Constitution of India .However, “equality before the law” does not mean that prejudices no longer exist in Indian society; in fact, there are numerous examples of discrimination against minority and marginalized groups.
For example, the majority of provisions frequently disregard gender diversity and presume that men are the offenders and women are the victims. In this sense, addressing inequality requires the creation and application of gender-neutral legislation. In a nutshell, gender-neutral laws aim to treat everyone equally and refrain from discriminating against them based on their gender, regardless of how they identify.
India’s legal landscape is rife with gender specific protections, most of which rightly aim to protect women against entrenched patriarchal structures. However, this often results in a legal blind spot regarding the experiences of men who face abuse, false accusations or discrimination. Despite a rise in documented cases of domestic abuse against men and misuse of matrimonial laws, the Indian Penal Code and special legislations like the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, remain largely one-sided. This lack of legal recourse raises serious constitutional concerns under Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 21 (Right to Life and Dignity).
Abstract
While India’s legal system has made progressive strides in empowering women, it has often overlooked the necessity of safeguarding men’s rights in a balanced and equitable manner. This article delves into the increasing demand for gender neutral laws, particularly in areas such as domestic violence, workplace harassment, and matrimonial disputes. Using constitutional principles, case law, and comparative.
Use of Legal Jargon
In the context of gender rights, several legal doctrines and terminologies become essential to the discourse. One such concept is the presumption of guilt, which is evident in provisions like Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, where the burden often shifts onto the accused male, undermining the principle of innocence until proven guilty. The lack of due process in many of these cases raises significant concerns, particularly when arrests are made without thorough investigation. Gender neutrality, a core constitutional value, demands that laws be drafted and interpreted in a manner that extends protection and liability to all individuals, irrespective of their gender identity. However, instances of reverse discrimination arise when protective statutes though well-intentioned end up disproportionately targeting men or denying them equal remedies. This imbalance often leads to cases of malicious prosecution, where legal mechanisms are misused to harass or coerce men through false or exaggerated allegations. Additionally, the absence of legal safeguards such as screening mechanisms, evidentiary thresholds, or grievance redressal options for male victims further entrenches inequality. For true justice, the application of these legal principles must reflect both equality before law and equity in outcome, ensuring that no gender is left outside the scope of legal protection.
The Proof
A close examination of India’s statutory framework reveals significant gender specificity in laws intended to provide protection from abuse and exploitation. For instance, Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code criminalizes cruelty against a wife by her husband or his relatives, but provides no counterpart protection for male victims of spousal abuse. Similarly, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, is explicitly framed around the presumption that only women can be victims in domestic settings, effectively excluding men and members of the LGBTQ+ community from its protective scope. Further, the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, institutionalizes mechanisms such as Internal Complaints Committees, yet it offers no statutory relief for male employees facing similar misconduct. These legal asymmetries not only contradict the principle of equality before law under Article 14 of the Constitution but also infringe upon the right to life and personal under Article 21 of Indian constitution.
Case Laws
1. Rajesh Sharma v. State of U.P. (2017) 8 SCC 746
– Court held there should be checks on immediate arrests under Section 498A by requiring approval from senior police officers. The main objective is to prevent innocent person from being arrested on behalf of complaints without investigation.
2. Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma (2013) 15 SCC 755
– The Court expanded the definition of a “domestic relationship” under the Domestic Violence Act, but the judgment highlighted the legislative gap in recognizing male victims in live-in or matrimonial-like relationships.
3. Narayan Ganesh Dastane v. Sucheta Dastane (1975) AIR 1534
– In this case the issue of mental cruelty in matrimonial disputes were raised up. Although focused on divorce, the case acknowledged the emotional suffering faced by men, foreshadowing the need for balanced protections.
4. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) 10 SCC 1
– In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court decriminalized consensual same-sex relationships under Section 377 IPC, reinforcing the principle of individual dignity and non-discrimination, paving the way for broader gender inclusivity in law.
5. Paul and Audrey Edwards v. United Kingdom (2002) ECHR
– The European Court of Human Rights held that the state has a duty to protect all individuals regardless of gender from inhuman and degrading treatment. This case underscores the international move toward gender-neutral legal protections.
Conclusion
Gender equality is not a one-way street. Laws meant to protect women must not create new categories of injustice. The Indian legal system must embrace gender neutrality in its statutes and enforcement mechanisms. This includes amending existing laws and introducing new frameworks that offer equal protection and redressal to men, women, and non-binary individuals alike. The recognition of men as potential victims does not dilute women’s rights , it enhances the credibility and fairness of the legal system. Justice, after all, must be blind not only to power but also to gender.
FAQS
1. Why are men’s rights not explicitly protected under Indian law?
Most protective laws were enacted to address systemic oppression of women. However, societal change demands that laws evolve to include male victims as well.
2. Are men allowed to file domestic violence complaints?
No. Under current Indian law, only women can seek relief under the Domestic Violence Act. Men must rely on general IPC provisions (e.g., Section 323, 506), which lack the protective intent of the DV Act.
3. Can men be sexually harassed in the workplace?
Yes, but there is no statutory mechanism (like an Internal Complaints Committee) for male victims. They must resort to general legal remedies, often less effective.
4. Are there countries with gender-neutral domestic violence laws?
Yes. Countries like Canada, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand have gender neutral laws that recognize all victims irrespective of sex or gender.
5. Is demanding men’s legal rights anti-women?
Not at all. Gender neutral laws ensure that every individual is protected. This is not about less protection for women , it’s about more justice for everyone.
