Abstract
India’s legal system, though rooted in constitutional ideals, still carries strong patriarchal (male-dominated) biases. This paper explores how these gendered norms—woven through caste, class, religion, and law—show up in criminal and family laws, court procedures, and judicial decisions. We look at key areas like rape laws, the marital rape exception, adultery, inheritance, domestic violence, and the low representation of women in the judiciary. Highlighting landmark judgments like Vishakha and Joseph Shine, we show how courts sometimes challenge, but often reinforce, inequality. Finally, the paper recommends reforms—expanding definitions of sexual violence, banning marital rape, training judges, increasing women’s representation, and raising awareness—to ensure that legal rights genuinely translate into justice.
1. Introduction
From colonial times to today, India’s legal system has reflected deep-seated patriarchal (male-centered) attitudes. This is clear in cases of dowry deaths, sexual violence, and gender discrimination. Despite laws meant to protect, the justice system often upholds traditional hierarchies instead of dismantling them.
So, this paper asks:
How deeply are patriarchal beliefs embedded in India’s laws and courts?
How do caste, religion, and class work together to reinforce gender inequality?
Does the judiciary help maintain these biases—or fight against them?
Beyond laws, what changes are needed for real, practical justice?
2. How Patriarchy Shows Up in Law
2.1 Casting Patriarchy
Historians like Uma Chakravarti explain how caste and gender oppression are intertwined in India’s legal system—especially in property, inheritance, and family laws. Lower-caste women often face harsher consequences of these biases.¹
2.2 Fewer Women in Court
Women are underrepresented in the legal profession—as judges, lawyers, and advocates. Only about 11 women have ever been on India’s Supreme Court, women are just 11.5% of High Court judges, and even fewer advocates work on behalf of women’s issues.² Without diverse voices, decision-making remains skewed.
2.3 Intersectionality: Multiple Layers of Oppression
A Dalit woman, a queer person, or someone with a disability faces unique challenges. The law often lacks awareness of how caste, gender, sexuality, and other factors intersect, leaving these groups vulnerable.³
3. Major Areas of Legal Bias
3.1 Rape Laws & Marital Exception
Current law defines rape as a man forcing himself on a woman, ignoring other forms of violence or other identities like male survivors, trans survivors. Marital rape—when husbands abuse wives—is still legal in most scenarios.⁴ ⁵
3.2 Adultery Law
Adultery law used to punish only the man involved, treating the woman as a piece of property. Thankfully, the Supreme Court struck this discriminatory rule down in Joseph Shine (2019).⁶
3.3 Inheritance & Parental Rights
While laws like the Hindu Succession Act grant equal inheritance to daughters, social customs frequently deny them these rights.⁷ Custody laws still often assume fathers are naturally better guardians.⁸
3.4 Domestic Violence
The Domestic Violence Act (2005) provides civil remedies—nothing criminal unless orders are ignored. Critics say it’s weakly enforced and carries social stigma, with some claiming it’s even misused.⁹ ¹⁰
4. Courts: Challengers or Silent Upholders?
4.1 Progress from the Courts
Vishakha (1997): In the absence of workplace harassment laws at the time, the Supreme Court issued clear guidelines to protect women—it was a landmark move.¹¹
Gaurav Nagpal (2009): The Allahabad High Court rejected outdated gender ideas, focusing on what’s best for the child, not just relying on parents’ roles.¹²
4.2 Where Courts Stay Silent
Yet courts often avoid tough issues—like marital rape remains legal, and poor enforcement of property laws shows limits in protecting rights. Some judgments even reinforce “family values” at the cost of women’s rights.¹³ ¹⁴
4.3 Culture Within the Courtrooms
Experts like Karuna Nundy highlight that courtrooms often show dismissive attitudes toward survivors, especially those from marginalized backgrounds. Bias and lack of awareness are still common.¹⁵
5. Can Courts Push for Reform?
5.1 The Upside
Courts can fill gaps when lawmakers drag their feet, protect rights through constitutional enforcement, and use intersectional thinking to challenge inequality.
5.2 The Risk
But judges aren’t elected, and may lack real-world expertise in gender trauma or social issues. Without strong enforcement, even good rulings can fail. Judicial activism done without context can feel overwhelming and undemocratic.
6. Finding the Right Balance
India practices a “flexible” separation of powers—allowing courts to step in when needed. But there’s a fine line between helpful intervention and unwanted overreach. Courts should ask:
Is there no law covering this?
Why has the legislature not acted—systemic failure or oversight?
Can courts issue temporary safeguards pending a law?
Judges must avoid imposing moral judgments or making decisions with no legal backing.
7. Recommendations & Conclusion
7.1 Law Reform
Outlaw marital rape and broaden definitions of sexual violence. Make laws gender-neutral but aware of real power imbalances. Enforce anti-dowry and inheritance laws, especially benefiting marginalized women.
7.2 Institutional Change
Appoint more women as judges and support women lawyers. Train judges and court staff on gender sensitivity and trauma-informed methods. Create oversight to ensure judgments for women’s justice are implemented.
7.3 Societal Change
Implement legal education in rural and marginalized areas. Support community-level women’s legal forums. Move beyond legal rhetoric, helping women build economic independence.
Conclusion
Patriarchy in India’s justice system is more than cultural—it’s structural, built into laws, court culture, and authority. Courts have a dual role: sometimes challenging patriarchy, sometimes reinforcing it. To truly uproot bias, we need comprehensive reform: changing laws, institutions, and mindsets. Justice shouldn’t stay as words on paper—it must be lived.
¹ Uma Chakravarti, Gendering Caste: Through a Feminist Lens (Sage Publications India 2003).
² Bar and Bench, ‘Only 11 Women Judges in SC since Independence’, (2023) https://www.barandbench.com accessed 20 July 2025.
³ National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights (NCDHR), ‘Dalit Women and Access to Justice’ (2020).
⁴ Indian Penal Code 1860, s 375.
⁵ Independent Thought v Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 800.
⁶ Joseph Shine v Union of India, (2019) 3 SCC 39.
⁷ Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005.
⁸ Githa Hariharan v RBI, (1999) 2 SCC 228.
⁹ Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005.
¹⁰ Ministry of Women and Child Development, ‘Report on Implementation of DV Act’ (2018). ¹¹ Vishaka v State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011.
¹² Gaurav Nagpal v Sumedha Nagpal, (2009) 1 SCC 42.
¹³ Sarla Mudgal v Union of India, (1995) 3 SCC 635.
¹⁴ Ahmedabad Women’s Action Group v Union of India, (1997) 3 SCC 573.
¹⁵ Karuna Nundy, ‘Gender and the Indian Judiciary’, Seminar 727 (March 2020).