'Patriarchy still a facet of everyday life, despite significant growth, education': Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said with significant economic growth, rising literacy, and increased participation of women in education and the workforce, gender roles do not apply strictly anymore in many urban areas, yet, in rural and semi-urban scenarios, patriarchy remains a facet of everyday life.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh said, "over the years numerous legislations were enacted, schemes brought into force, and judgments delivered, focused on the upliftment of women, yet practices such as domestic abuse or even extreme acts like burning a wife persist not as aberrations, but as indications of a disease afflicted social order."

"After decades of laws, schemes, reforms, and judicial recognition of equality across workplaces, homes, personal relationships, and even the armed forces, why does the control over women’s bodies, choices, and lives still persist so deeply within society? Perhaps, the answer lies only with 'We, the People of India”, the bench said in its judgment on April 2, 2026.

The court penned down a postscript, dealing with the social order, affecting women, while affirming the concurrent conviction and sentence of life term imposed on appellant Shankar for killing his wife by setting her afire.

The appellant was allegedly enraged over her act of going to her parental house and failing to cook food for him within one month of marriage.

"The offence in question is of the year 2011. At that point in time, we were 64 years into being an independent country. The Constitution promises equality, non-discrimination on the basis of sex and the right to life and liberty amongst others. However, cases such as these, demonstrate that even after so many years, rights enshrined in the founding Charter are still elusive for many,'' the bench said.

The court noted the process of unshackling the society from the deeply stigmatic understandings of women and their roles, began immediately after independence. Early legislative efforts such as the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 were aimed at dismantling one of the most deep-rooted practices of patriarchal control, i.e., dowry. 

This was followed by the introduction of provisions like Section 498A, IPC addressing cruelty by husbands and relatives, and later the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 which recognised domestic abuse as a civil wrong requiring immediate relief and protection. When it comes to equality in workplace, the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 institutionalized safeguards following the Vishaka guidelines laid down by this court, the bench said.

The court said, dowry has been outlawed for decades but the social legitimacy that sustains it is yet to be dismantled. Welfare schemes can incentivize education, but cannot alter long-held beliefs about women’s roles within marriage and family.

With regard to women's rights and their expansion into varied aspects, the bench listed out a series of judicial pronouncements. In Shayara Bano Vs Union of India (2017), the practice of instant triple talaq was declared unconstitutional, affirming women’s rights within personal law frameworks. In Joseph Shine Vs Union of India (2018), the court struck down the adultery law, emphasizing equality and autonomy.

In Secretary, Ministry of Defence Vs Babita Puniya (2020), the court upheld the right of women officers to be granted permanent commission in the Indian Army, rejecting institutional stereotypes about gender roles. In Vineeta Sharma Vs Rakesh Sharma (2020), daughters were recognized as equal coparceners in Hindu joint family property. 

The court has also addressed the complexities of domestic violence, in Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar (2014) while cautioning against misuse of Section 498A, it reaffirmed the seriousness of cruelty against married women, and in Hiral P Harsora Vs Kusum Narottamdas Harsora (2016), it expanded the scope of the DVA to include complaints against female relatives within the household. The court has further intervened in matters of personal liberty and choice.

In Shakti Vahini Vs Union of India (2018), the court issued detailed guidelines to prevent honour killings, recognising that societal and familial control over women’s choices in marriage is a direct assault on their fundamental rights.

Similarly, in Shafin Jahan Vs Asokan K M (2018), the court upheld an adult woman’s right to choose her partner, affirming that neither the State nor the family can dictate personal decisions central to individual dignity and autonomy, the bench noted.

Parallel to legal reform, the State has also invested in welfare and social transformation schemes. Programmes such as Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao, are aimed at correcting gender imbalances and improving girls’ education, while initiatives like Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana and Ujjwala Yojana aim to enhance financial security and improve living conditions for women, the court noted.

"Yet, despite this sustained intervention from different branches of Government, empirical data shows that all is not well. It presents a sobering picture indeed,'' the bench said.

The court also cited the National Crime Records Bureau, indicating more than 4.48 lakh crimes against women were recorded in 2023. Dowry-related violence continued to claim over 6,000 lives annually, revealing the persistence of practices that have long been outlawed.