Abstract
Gender rights in India have undergone a lengthy and intricate transformation—from historical marginalization and legal nonrecognition to constitutional acknowledgment and legislative safeguards. In a nation where gender-based discrimination persists through entrenched social customs, the judicial system presents both promise and obstacles. India’s Constitution establishes robust safeguards for gender parity, and numerous decades of lawmaking have tackled concerns ranging from workplace harassment to household violence. Nevertheless, substantial deficiencies persist: forced marital intercourse remains outside criminal law, religious personal codes generate disparate treatment across faiths, and enforcement of current statutes frequently proves inadequate. This analysis investigates how India’s legal structure for gender rights has developed, evaluates pivotal judicial decisions that have influenced gender fairness, and pinpoints obstacles requiring attention. It contends that although written legislation has enhanced considerably, genuine parity demands not simply progressive lawmaking but successful enforcement, societal transformation, and dedication to meaningful rather than simply procedural equality.
Introduction
Each judicial system mirrors the principles of the society it regulates. Throughout most of history, Indian jurisprudence—similar to legal systems globally—regarded women as inferior citizens. Women lacked ownership rights, possessed minimal matrimonial entitlements, and frequently faced complete denial of judicial access. The British colonial era introduced certain modifications, yet simultaneously strengthened numerous discriminatory customs through codification of religious laws.
India’s Constitution, embraced in 1950, signified a pivotal moment. It proclaimed equality as an essential entitlement and explicitly forbade discrimination based on gender. Women obtained voting rights, office-holding capacity, and equal legal protection claims. However, constitutional assurances alone cannot transform centuries of social custom immediately. The progression from legal acknowledgment to actual practice has demanded decades of activism, legal challenges, and legislative modification.
Currently, India possesses an expansive structure of regulations safeguarding gender rights— addressing matters from equivalent compensation and maternal advantages to household violence and sexual harassment. The nation has endorsed international agreements like CEDAW (Convention on Eliminating All Forms of Women’s Discrimination) and integrated numerous principles into national legislation. Judicial bodies have issued progressive rulings that have broadened the interpretation of equality and dignity.
Nevertheless, obstacles endure. Enforcement remains inadequate across many domains. Cultural perspectives frequently conflict with legal entitlements. And certain fundamental
concerns—such as criminalizing forced marital intercourse or implementing a uniform civil code—remain unaddressed, trapped between conflicting perspectives on tradition and equality. This analysis evaluates both advancement achieved and tasks remaining in constructing a genuinely equitable legal structure for women in India.
Constitutional Foundations: The Foundation of Gender Rights
India’s Constitution doesn’t merely allow equality for women—it actively mandates it. Multiple essential clauses establish the legal basis for gender fairness.
Article 14 ensures parity before the law and equal legal protection for all individuals. This has become the initial reference point for contesting any regulation or custom that treats women inequitably. Judicial bodies have construed this clause expansively, invalidating discriminatory regulations in employment, education, and public administration.
Article 15 advances further by explicitly forbidding discrimination based on gender. Yet significantly, Article 15(3) additionally permits the government to establish special measures for women and minors. This signifies affirmative action initiatives—such as allocated positions in local administration or focused welfare programs—are constitutionally legitimate. The clause acknowledges that procedural equality proves insufficient when beginning from historical disadvantage.
Article 16 guarantees equal opportunity in government employment. This has been employed to contest rules that treated women distinctly—from marriage prohibitions in government positions to compulsory retirement regulations for airline attendants. The concept is straightforward: employment choices should derive from capability, not gender.
Article 21, which safeguards life and personal freedom, has been construed broadly by judicial bodies to encompass dignity, privacy, and physical autonomy. This has become essential in matters involving sexual violence, reproductive entitlements, and household abuse. The Supreme Court has consistently maintained that existence with dignity constitutes the constitutional guarantee—not simple survival.
The Constitution additionally incorporates Directive Principles guiding policymaking. Article 39(d) explicitly requires equivalent compensation for equivalent labor for both genders.
Article 42 demands maternal assistance and humane working conditions. Although these aren’t directly enforceable judicially, they establish a structure for lawmaking and can be utilized to construe other constitutional clauses.
Perhaps most symbolically, Article 51A(e) establishes a fundamental obligation for all citizens to abandon customs degrading to women’s dignity. This constitutional dedication to women’s dignity has been referenced in cases contesting everything from dowry customs to workplace harassment.
The Evolution: From Marginalization to Acknowledgment
The Colonial Heritage
Prior to independence, women’s legal position was regulated by a mixture of religious codes, customary customs, and restricted British modifications. The situation was grim: widows couldn’t remarry in numerous communities, women possessed virtually no ownership or inheritance entitlements, child marriage was prevalent, and educational and employment access was severely limited.
Certain colonial-period modifications did arise through social activism. The Hindu Widow Remarriage Act of 1856 legalized widow remarriage—a transformative change for that period. The Child Marriage Restraint Act of 1929 established minimum marriage ages, though enforcement proved weak and the custom persisted. Yet these modifications were restricted, frequently opposed, and didn’t fundamentally alter women’s subordinate legal position.
Post-Independence Revolution
The Constitution of 1950 transformed everything theoretically. Universal adult voting meant women could vote and seek office. The equality clauses established legal foundations to contest discrimination. Yet converting constitutional principles into practical legislation required time and political determination.
The Hindu Code Bills of the 1950s constituted watershed developments. Despite intense resistance from conservative factions, Parliament enacted regulations reforming Hindu matrimony, inheritance, adoption, and maintenance. The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 provided women divorce and maintenance entitlements—previously, solely men could initiate divorce. The Hindu Succession Act of 1956 awarded women inheritance entitlements, though these were initially restricted compared to men’s entitlements.
These modifications only applied to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs—leaving Muslims, Christians, Parsis, and others regulated by their respective religious codes. This created what persists currently: differing legal standards for women based on their religion.
The Constitution of 1950 transformed everything theoretically. Universal adult voting meant women could vote and seek office. The equality clauses established legal foundations to contest discrimination. Yet converting constitutional principles into practical legislation required time and political determination.
The Hindu Code Bills of the 1950s constituted watershed developments. Despite intense resistance from conservative factions, Parliament enacted regulations reforming Hindu matrimony, inheritance, adoption, and maintenance. The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 provided women divorce and maintenance entitlements—previously, solely men could initiate divorce. The Hindu Succession Act of 1956 awarded women inheritance entitlements, though these were initially restricted compared to men’s entitlements.
These modifications only applied to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs—leaving Muslims, Christians, Parsis, and others regulated by their respective religious codes. This created what persists currently: differing legal standards for women based on their religion.
Contemporary Progress
The legal terrain has continued developing. The Equal Remuneration Act of 1976 required equivalent compensation for equivalent labor. The Maternity Benefit Act, initially enacted in 1961, has been modified multiple times to expand leave and advantages. The 2005 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act established a thorough civil remedy for household abuse, acknowledging that household violence isn’t solely physical assault but encompasses economic, emotional, and sexual abuse.
The 2013 Criminal Law Amendment Act, enacted after the horrific Nirbhaya gang rape incident in Delhi, reinforced sexual assault regulations, defined new violations, and enhanced penalties. The 2013 Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act finally provided legislative support to safeguards initially outlined by the Supreme Court in the Vishaka decision.
Most recently, the 2019 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act criminalized the custom of instant triple talaq, safeguarding Muslim women from arbitrary divorce. This proved controversial yet represented a substantial intervention in religious law for gender fairness.
Landmark Cases: When Judicial Bodies Pioneered Change
Sometimes transformation originates not from Parliament but from courtrooms. Multiple pivotal Supreme Court decisions have fundamentally influenced women’s rights in India.
Breaking Employment Obstacles
In Air India v. Nergesh Meerza (1981), the Supreme Court invalidated Air India’s service terms that compelled airline attendants to retire at age 35 or upon marriage, whereas male cabin personnel faced no such limitations. The Court termed this “hostile discrimination” and determined it violated Articles 14 and 15. This decision established that seemingly neutral employment regulations that disproportionately harm women are unconstitutional.
C.B. Muthamma v. Union of India (1979) contested the Indian Foreign Service regulation requiring female officers to secure permission before marriage and requiring resignation if they married a foreign citizen. The Court invalidated these clauses, acknowledging they were founded on outdated stereotypes regarding women’s roles and abilities.
Workplace Harassment
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) is arguably the most significant decision on workplace sexual harassment. After a social worker named Bhanwari Devi was gang-raped in Rajasthan while attempting to prevent a child marriage, the Supreme Court took independent action.
Since India lacked legislation addressing workplace sexual harassment then, the Court established comprehensive framework, referencing international conventions India had endorsed. These Vishaka Guidelines remained binding for 16 years until Parliament enacted the Sexual Harassment Act in 2013.
Religious Law and Gender Fairness
Religious law decisions have been among the most disputed. In the Shah Bano decision (1985), the Supreme Court mandated maintenance for a divorced Muslim woman under criminal law clauses, triggering massive controversy about judicial interference in religious law. The decision highlighted the conflict between uniform civil entitlements and religious liberty.
More recently, Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017) ruled the custom of instant triple talaq (where a Muslim man could divorce his wife by stating “talaq” thrice) unconstitutional. The Court determined that customs harmful to women couldn’t be safeguarded as essential religious customs. This prompted the 2019 legislation criminalizing triple talaq.
The Sabarimala decision (Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, 2018) raised similar questions about religious liberty versus gender equality when the Court permitted
women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala temple, which had customarily barred menstruating-age women. The decision remains controversial and demonstrates how legal modification frequently advances ahead of social acceptance.
Ownership Rights and Economic Fairness
In Madhu Kishwar v. State of Bihar (1996), the Supreme Court addressed tribal women’s land entitlements in Jharkhand, determining that customary customs denying women ownership rights violated constitutional equality. The Court instructed governments to pass regulations safeguarding women’s ownership rights in tribal regions.
Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India (1999) contested a clause in the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act that designated the father as the “natural guardian” of a minor child, with the mother becoming guardian only “after him.” The Court interpreted this as “in the absence of” rather than sequentially, partially addressing the discrimination, though the clause itself wasn’t invalidated.
The Gaps That Remain: Incomplete Work
Despite substantial advancement, India’s legal structure for women’s rights contains serious deficiencies and enforcement obstacles.
The Marital Rape Exemption
One of the most conspicuous inconsistencies in Indian legislation is Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which states sexual intercourse by a man with his spouse, if she exceeds 18 years of age, isn’t rape. This means a husband cannot be prosecuted for raping his spouse, even if forced sexual intercourse occurs.
This exemption has been contested in judicial bodies multiple times. Advocates for transformation argue it violates women’s constitutional entitlements to equality, dignity, and physical autonomy. Defenders of the exemption claim it safeguards the marriage institution and that criminalization could be exploited. The debate persists, yet India remains among only 36 nations that haven’t fully criminalized marital rape.
Uniform Civil Code
Article 44 of the Constitution instructs the government to establish a uniform civil code for all citizens. Currently, different religious communities adhere to different religious codes regulating marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption. This generates vastly different legal standards for women based on their religion.
Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, and Sikh women have been regulated by reformed regulations since the 1950s. Muslim women remain subject to Shariat law, which many contend is discriminatory in multiple respects. Christian and Parsi women face their own set of outdated clauses. The uniform civil code discussion is politically sensitive, frequently presented as a conflict between secularism and religious liberty, yet fundamentally concerns women’s equal entitlements.
Enforcement Failures
Possessing legislation theoretically is one matter; implementing them is another. Numerous well-designed regulations fail in execution due to inadequate infrastructure, insufficient awareness, social stigma, and bureaucratic indifference.
The 2005 Domestic Violence Act, for instance, establishes protection officers, service providers, and refuge facilities—yet numerous regions lack these resources. Women frequently don’t know their legal entitlements. Police may prove unsympathetic or reject complaints. Judicial processes are slow and intimidating.
Similarly, the Sexual Harassment Act requires Internal Complaints Committees in workplaces, yet numerous organizations—particularly smaller ones—either lack them or don’t treat complaints seriously. The fear of employment termination frequently silences victims.
Ownership Rights in Practice
Despite legal modifications, women’s ownership remains shockingly minimal. According to recent assessments, women possess less than 15% of agricultural land in India. Cultural conventions pressure women to surrender inheritance favoring brothers. Fear of family discord or being refused access to one’s birth home leads numerous women not to claim their legal entitlements.
The 2005 modification to the Hindu Succession Act provided daughters equal coparcenary entitlements in ancestral property—a major modification. Yet awareness and actual execution lag considerably behind. Rural women, particularly, face immense obstacles to claiming ownership entitlements.
Intersectionality: Multiple Discriminations
Legal structures frequently neglect to address how gender intersects with other identities— caste, economic status, religion, disability, sexuality, and geography. A Dalit woman experiences discrimination differently from an upper-caste woman. A disabled woman’s experience differs from an able-bodied woman’s. A transgender woman faces unique obstacles not addressed in most women’s rights regulations.
Rural women possess less judicial access, legal assistance, and information than urban women. Economically disadvantaged women cannot afford legal representation or navigate complex judicial processes. Legal modifications appearing progressive theoretically may not reach the women requiring them most.
Learning From Others: Global Perspectives
Examining how other nations have addressed gender equality can offer valuable insights for India.
The Scandinavian Approach
Nations like Sweden, Norway, and Iceland consistently rank highest on gender equality measurements. Their legal structures include comprehensive anti-discrimination regulations, compulsory parental leave incorporating fathers, gender quotas on corporate leadership, and robust enforcement mechanisms. The emphasis isn’t merely on forbidding discrimination but on actively advancing equality through policy.
These nations additionally integrate gender perspectives into all lawmaking and budgeting— termed “gender mainstreaming.” Every regulation is evaluated for its gender equality impact before enactment.
South Africa’s Constitutional Strategy
South Africa’s post-apartheid Constitution explicitly forbids discrimination based on gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, and sexual orientation. It acknowledges meaningful equality— signifying the law must address historical disadvantages, not merely treat everyone identically. The Constitutional Court possesses strong enforcement authority and has issued progressive rulings on gender entitlements.
South Africa additionally has specialized equality tribunals handling discrimination matters, making justice more accessible and faster than proceeding through regular judicial bodies.
Canada’s Equality Assurances
Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms incorporates strong equality clauses with specific safeguards for affirmative action initiatives. The Supreme Court of Canada has construed equality to demand meaningful rather than procedural equality—a distinction Indian judicial bodies are also beginning to embrace.
Canada additionally has comprehensive human rights legislation at both federal and provincial tiers, with commissions that investigate complaints and can mandate remedies.
Insights for India
These global examples suggest multiple approaches India could embrace:
- Merging fragmented anti-discrimination regulations into a single comprehensive Gender Equality Act
- Establishing specialized fast-track tribunals for gender-based violence and discrimination matters
- Creating stronger enforcement bodies with authority to investigate and mandate remedies
- Executing gender-impact evaluations for all lawmaking
- Compulsory gender-sensitivity instruction for judges, police, and government personnel
Contemporary Challenges: New Entitlements, New Discussions
As society develops, new concerns emerge that test the boundaries of women’s rights legislation.
Reproductive Entitlements and Autonomy
India’s abortion regulation, the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act (recently modified in 2021), permits abortion up to 20 weeks and in special circumstances up to 24 weeks. This is relatively progressive compared to numerous nations. However, access remains restricted, particularly in rural regions, and social stigma endures.
Questions about reproductive autonomy extend beyond abortion—to contraception access, maternal healthcare, surrogacy regulation, and freedom from coerced sterilization. The 2021 Surrogacy Regulation Act, while well-designed in preventing exploitation, has been criticized for being excessively restrictive and paternalistic toward women’s choices.
Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation
The 2018 Navtej Singh Johar decision, which decriminalized same-sex relations, and the 2014 NALSA decision, which acknowledged transgender entitlements, have broadened the discussion beyond the gender binary. These decisions acknowledge that gender and sexuality exist on a spectrum and that everyone—regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation— deserves equal safeguards and dignity.
However, most “women’s rights” regulations are drafted with cisgender women in consideration. Transgender women and non-binary individuals frequently fall through gaps. There’s increasing acknowledgment that gender fairness must be inclusive and intersectional.
Digital Entitlements and Online Violence
Technology has generated new forms of gender-based violence—cyberstalking, revenge pornography, deepfakes, online harassment, and digital surveillance. Although India’s IT Act and criminal legislation have certain clauses addressing cybercrimes, they weren’t designed with gender-specific online violence in consideration.
Female journalists, activists, and public figures face coordinated online harassment campaigns aimed at silencing them. Sharing intimate images without consent (frequently termed “revenge porn”) causes immense harm yet isn’t adequately addressed in legislation. There’s urgent need for legal structures that comprehend and address the gendered dimensions of digital violence.
Economic Entitlements and Labor Legislation
Women’s workforce participation in India has actually declined in recent years. Legal obstacles like discriminatory labor regulations (recently reformed yet with continuing challenges) combine with social factors—unpaid care labor, safety concerns, lack of childcare—to keep women from formal employment.
The gig economy presents new obstacles: platform workers frequently lack the safeguards of formal employment, including maternal advantages, sexual harassment protections, and social security. Legal structures designed for traditional employment don’t fit the realities of contemporary work.
Political Involvement
Despite constitutional equality, women remain severely underrepresented in politics. The Women’s Reservation Bill, which would allocate one-third of positions in Parliament and state legislatures for women, has been pending for decades. Although local governance has 33-50% allocation for women in most states, this hasn’t translated to higher government tiers.
Legal interventions alone won’t resolve this—political parties’ resistance, social perspectives, and practical obstacles all contribute. Yet legal requirements for representation have proven successful at the local tier and could drive transformation in higher bodies.
The Way Forward: What Requires Transformation
Enhancing women’s rights in India demands action on multiple fronts—legislative, judicial, administrative, and social.
Legislative Priorities
First, criminalize marital rape without exemptions. The current legal position that a spouse doesn’t possess the entitlement to refuse her husband is fundamentally inconsistent with constitutional principles of equality and dignity.
Second, work toward a uniform civil code that’s genuinely egalitarian. Rather than imposing Hindu legislation on everyone or selecting the most regressive aspects of each religion’s codes, India requires secular personal legislation that treats all citizens equally regardless of religion, with strong safeguards for women’s entitlements in marriage, divorce, maintenance, custody, and inheritance.
Third, merge anti-discrimination regulations into a comprehensive Gender Equality Act that addresses all forms of discrimination, establishes strong enforcement mechanisms, and incorporates clauses for remedies and compensation.
Fourth, modify ownership regulations and inheritance customs with clear execution guidelines, awareness campaigns, and simplified procedures that enable women to actually claim their legal entitlements without family discord or social exclusion.
Judicial Modifications
Create additional fast-track tribunals specifically for violence against women matters. The backlog in judicial bodies means numerous matters take years to resolve, during which victims may experience continued harassment or be compelled into compromising.
Make gender-sensitivity instruction compulsory for all judges, legal practitioners, and judicial personnel. Numerous victims are re-traumatized by insensitive questioning, victim-blaming perspectives, and lack of comprehension about the dynamics of gender-based violence.
Establish gender-sensitive alternative dispute resolution mechanisms for appropriate matters—with clear safeguards to guarantee women aren’t pressured into inequitable compromises in matters like household violence or sexual assault that shouldn’t be “mediated” away.
Institutional Enhancement
Enhance the authority and resources of National and State Women’s Commissions. Currently, these bodies can only make recommendations; they require stronger enforcement authority and adequate funding to be successful.
Broaden legal assistance services with a specific emphasis on women from disadvantaged communities. Numerous women don’t pursue their entitlements simply because they cannot afford legal representation. Free legal assistance that’s actually accessible and competent is essential.
Establish specialized units in police stations for crimes against women, staffed by trained personnel who comprehend trauma, gender dynamics, and legal procedures. The current custom of insensitive police responses discourages numerous women from reporting crimes.
Execution and Awareness
Launch comprehensive public awareness campaigns about women’s legal entitlements. Numerous women don’t know they possess entitlements under legislation—to ownership, to safeguards from household violence, to workplace harassment resolution, to maintenance.
Conduct periodic audits and assessments of how regulations are actually functioning. Are protection officers under the Domestic Violence Act functioning? Are Internal Complaints Committees in workplaces successful? Are fast-track tribunals reducing delays? Data-driven evaluation can identify what’s functioning and what requires fixing.
Engage civil society organizations as collaborators in execution. Women’s rights groups, legal assistance organizations, and grassroots movements frequently possess better reach and trust in communities than government agencies.
Conclusion
Women’s rights legislation in India narrates two stories. One is of remarkable advancement— from a period when women possessed virtually no legal entitlements to a constitutional structure that establishes equality, decades of progressive lawmaking, and judicial rulings that have broadened the interpretation of dignity and fairness.
The other story is of deficiencies that endure—regulations that haven’t kept pace with reality, execution that falls short of promise, and social perspectives that resist legal transformation. Marital rape remains lawful. Religious codes create unequal treatment. Women’s ownership is minimal despite legal entitlements. Violence against women persists at alarming rates despite stronger regulations.
The path forward demands acknowledging that procedural legal equality isn’t sufficient. Meaningful equality—where women possess not merely entitlements theoretically but the actual capacity to exercise them—requires more than legislative modification. It demands adequate resources for enforcement, accessible justice mechanisms, social awareness and perspective transformation, and continuous engagement with how gender intersects with other identities and inequalities.
Technology presents both new obstacles and new opportunities. The digital era has generated new forms of violence against women yet also new tools for awareness, mobilization, and justice access. How India navigates this will influence women’s rights for generations.
Ultimately, the success of women’s rights legislation depends not merely on what Parliament enacts or judicial bodies declare, but on whether women across India—regardless of religion, caste, economic status, location, or any other identity—can actually access justice when their entitlements are violated. The objective isn’t merely legal modification but social transformation toward genuine equality.
The work is far from complete. Yet the constitutional dedication to equality, the expanding body of progressive lawmaking, and the activism of countless individuals and organizations working for gender fairness provide reason for optimism. The law cannot transform society immediately, yet it can push boundaries, contest norms, and establish space for that transformation to occur.
This analysis emerges from my study of women’s rights legislation and my conviction that comprehending legal history and current obstacles is essential for anyone dedicated to constructing a more equal society.
References
Constitutional Provisions
- Constitution of India, 1950 (Articles 14, 15, 16, 19, 21, 39, 42, 51A)
International Instruments
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948
- Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), 1979
- Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, 1995
- UN Sustainable Development Goals, 2015
Major Legislation
- Hindu Widow Remarriage Act, 1856
- Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929
- Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
- Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (Amended 2005)
- Equal Remuneration Act, 1976
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005
- Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013
- Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013
- Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019
Landmark Cases
- C.B. Muthamma v. Union of India, AIR 1979 SC 1868
- Air India v. Nergesh Meerza, AIR 1981 SC 1829
- Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, AIR 1985 SC 945
- Madhu Kishwar v. State of Bihar, AIR 1996 SC 1864
- Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011
- Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India, AIR 1999 SC 1149
- National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India, AIR 2014 SC 1863
- Shayara Bano v. Union of India, (2017) 9 SCC 1
- Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1
- Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, (2019) 11 SCC 1
Books and Articles
- Basu, D.D. (2019). Commentary on the Constitution of India. LexisNexis.
- Kapur, Ratna. (2021). Gender, Alterity and Human Rights. Hart Publishing.
- Agnes, Flavia. (2020). “Women’s Rights and Legal Reforms in India.” Economic and Political Weekly, 45(17), 36-42.
- Parashar, Archana. (2019). “Gender Equality and Constitutional Law in India.” Indian Law Review, 3(2), 123-145.
Reports
- Law Commission of India, Various Reports on Women’s Rights
- National Crime Records Bureau. (2024). Crime in India Statistics
- UN Women. (2024). Progress of the World’s Women Report
