WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA: A Hearty Postscript of a Judge

By: Dr. N. Brajakanta Singh, Assistant Professor of Law, DMU
In the recent past, the State witnessed murders of three married women in Imphal West District, of which the police are clueless about two cases and as such the perpetrators are yet to be arrested, prosecuted and punished in accordance with law. In this piece, the writer examines a very recent judgment delivered by the honorable Supreme Court of India wherein the court expressing its anguish about the state of affairs related to womenfolk of the country. On April 6, 2026, a division Bench of the Supreme Court of India comprising Justices Sanjoy Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh in the case of Shankar v. State of Rajasthan, 2026 INSC 315, upheld the decision of a trial court which awarded life imprisonment to an accused husband for murdering his newly married wife by burning with kerosene oil in 2011, based on the dying declaration made by the deceased woman. While dismissing the appeal filed by the accused husband, the honorable judge who authored the judgment had cogently written a postscript detailing how Indian women are suffering despite having various statutes and landmark judgments declared by the higher judiciary. The Supreme Court observed that in 2011 we were 64 years into being an independent country. The Constitution of India promises equality, non-discrimination based on 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. It could be argued and very well proved that a further fourteen years down the line, despite incremental progress the issues highlighted by the incidence such as in the present case, largely remain the same. Over the years numerous legislations were enacted, schemes brought into force, and judgments delivered, focused on the upliftment of women and eradication of difficulties faced by them arising out of inherent social stigma and deep-rooted patriarchal and conservative practices.
Legal reforms
The process of liberating the society from these 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 introduction of provisions like Section 498A, Indian Penal Code (now replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) addressing cruelty by husbands and relatives, and later the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,2005 which recognized 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, 2013institutionalized safeguards following the Vishaka guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court of India. The interpretation of these rights and their expansion into varied aspects of women’s life have taken place through a series of judicial pronouncements. In Shayara Bano v. Union of India,(2017) 9 SCC 1, the practice of instant triple talaq was declared unconstitutional, affirming women’s rights within personal law frameworks. In Joseph Shine v. Union of India,(2018) 2 SCC 189 the Court struck down the adultery law, emphasizing equality and autonomy. In Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya,(2020) 7 SCC 469, the Court upheld the right of women officers to be granted permanent commission inthe Indian Army, rejecting institutional stereotypes about gender roles. In Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, (2020) 9 SCC 1, daughters were recognized as equal coparceners in Hindu joint family property. The Court has also addressed the complexities of domestic violence, in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273, while cautioning against misuse of Section 498A, it reaffirmed the seriousness of cruelty against married women, and in Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora, (2016) 10 SCC 165, it expanded the scope of the Domestic Violence Act to include complaints against female relatives within the household. The Court has further intervened in matters of personal liberty and choice. In Shakti Vahini v. Union of India,(2018) 7 SCC 192, it issued detailed guidelines to prevent honor killings, recognizing that societal and familial control over women’s choices in marriage is a direct assault on their fundamental rights. Similarly, in Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M.,(2018) 16 SCC 368. 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. 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.
Practical realities
Yet, despite this sustained intervention from different branches of Government, empirical data shows that all is not well. It presents a sobering picture indeed. As per the National Crime Records Bureau, more than 4.48 lakh crimes against women were recorded in 2023(CrimeinIndia2023Part1). Dowry-related violence continues to claim over 6,000 lives annually, revealing the persistence of practices that have long been outlawed. Complaints before the National Commission for Women also consistently show domestic violence as one of the most reported. What makes this reality particularly troubling is the context in which it exists. India has experienced 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. One cannot assume that all house-hold related work falls to the woman, whereas it is only the male who is tasked with bread winning. Yet, in rural and semi-urban scenarios, patriarchy remains a facet of everyday life. Authority within the household is still overwhelmingly male, and women’s autonomy is often conditional and constrained. Even if the woman earns, it would still be expected of her that she would set the house right before leaving for work, and busily engage herself in similar work including preparation of meals, when shere turns from work. The coexistence of progress and violence signals to a paradox. Legal and economic advancements are visible on a macro-level, but patriarchy still permeates the everyday. Dowry is outlawed and has been 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. As a result, practices such as domestic abuse or even extreme acts like burning a wife(such as in this case) 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 persist so deeply within society? The learned judge astonishingly concludes that -Perhaps, the answer lies only with “We, the People of India.”