ABSTRACT
This paper examines the escalating issue of sexual violence in India, juxtaposed against the backdrop of legal inadequacies that hinder justice for both female victims and male accused. The primary objective is to highlight the increasing rates of sexual violence against women, compounded by significant delays in judicial proceedings that often lead to tragic outcomes, including suicide among victims. Conversely, the study also addresses the plight of men who face wrongful accusations, resulting in mental health crises and societal stigma. Utilizing a doctrinal legal methodology, the research systematically analyzes pertinent statutes, including the Indian Penal Code, the POCSO Act, and the POSH Act, alongside recent judicial interpretations and reforms. Key findings reveal that while gender-specific laws are crucial for safeguarding women, they inadequately address the rights of male victims and LGBTQ+ victims, falsely accused men, leading to a skewed legal landscape. Furthermore, the paper identifies a troubling trend of legal misuse, with rising instances of false allegations causing irreversible harm to the accused. The absence of gender-neutral legal frameworks exacerbates this imbalance, leaving innocent men vulnerable without effective recourse. The judiciary’s acknowledgment of these issues has not translated into timely reforms, as legislative changes remain limited. This study underscores the urgent need for a balanced approach that prioritizes women’s safety while ensuring the rights of all victims, thereby fostering a more equitable legal environment in India.
KEYWORDS
Gender justice, legal gaps, sexual violence, false allegations, criminological perspective, gender-neutral laws
INTRODUCTION
“The law must protect the innocent as much as it punishes the guilty”
- Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
It is rightly said that the law must protect the victim and punish the one who commits a crime. Sexual violence remains one of the most deeply rooted and alarming forms of crime in Indian society. While legal reforms over the years have aimed to strengthen protections for women, the rise in reported cases and low conviction rates raise critical questions about the system’s effectiveness. At the same time, a growing discourse has emerged around the misuse of gender-based laws, with increasing concerns about false allegations and the lack of safeguards for men. This paper seeks to explore the complex and often controversial terrain of sexual violence laws in India examining how they protect women, how they may be misused, and whether the current legal framework ensures justice for all. Through a criminological and legal lens, the paper aims to strike a balance between the rights of victims and the rights of the accused, regardless of gender.
UNDERSTANDING SEXUAL VIOLENCE IN INDIA
Sexual violence comprises a wide range of offences—rape, assault, stalking, voyeurism, and workplace harassment. These acts inflict not only physical harm but also deep psychological trauma. High-profile incidents like the 2012 Nirbhaya case in Delhi and the horrific 2025 Varanasi gang rape have repeatedly spotlighted the urgent need for stronger protection measures.
Recent Incidence Statistics
- In 2022, the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) recorded 31,516 rape cases, averaging nearly 86 daily incidents
- The same year saw 445,256 total crimes against women—approximately 51 reported every hour—with rape comprising just 7.1% of the total
- In 2021, NCRB reported 31,677 rapes, with 89% of victims knowing their offender, and minors (under 18) forming 10% of victims
- NCRB data reveal that 31.4% of crimes involved cruelty from husband or his relatives, followed by kidnappings/abduction (19.2%), assault to outrage modesty (18.7%), and rape (7.1%)
- 2022 NCRB also recorded that 66% of rape survivors were aged 18–30, highlighting workplace and urban-minority vulnerability
Yet, there are many cases that we still don’t know about because of the social stigma i.e., only 1% of victims report to police, rest all remain quiet. Another reason is also marital rape not criminalized, which further reduced the count.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research follows a doctrinal legal methodology, which involves the systematic study of statutes, case laws, constitutional provisions, and legal commentaries. The paper analyses relevant laws such as the Indian Penal Code, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, POCSO Act, and the POSH Act, along with recent judicial interpretations and reforms. Secondary sources such as reports from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), Law Commission of India, and credible news articles have been consulted to present recent data (2023–2025). The paper also incorporates case studies and criminological perspectives to evaluate the effectiveness of existing legal frameworks, while critically examining areas where the system fails to deliver justice impartially.
Legal framework
Key laws addressing sexual offences include:
- Indian Penal Code (IPC) – Section 375 & 376
Section 375 defines the offence of rape in a narrow, gender-specific way as a crime committed by a man against a woman without her consent. Section 376 provides punishment for rape, with imprisonment ranging from 10 years to life.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2024, which replaces the IPC, these provisions remain largely the same, but with added clarity on aggravated offences and gang rape. The BNS also prescribes stricter timelines for investigation and trial. - Section 354 (A to D) of IPC / BNS
These sections address offences related to sexual harassment and misconduct:
354A – Sexual harassment (unwelcome physical contact, demands, etc.)
354B – Assault to disrobe
354C – Voyeurism (watching/recording someone in a private act)
354D – Stalking (physically or through electronic means)
The BNS 2024 has retained and slightly expanded these definitions. In 2022, over 90,000 cases were registered under these sections combined (NCRB).
- POSH Act, 2013 (Sexual Harassment at Workplace)
This act mandates every workplace to prevent and redress sexual harassment against women through an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC).
Though effective, it applies only to women, and many reports (including the 2024 NCW review) show low awareness and poor implementation, especially in informal sectors
Despite the existence of stricter laws, the high incidence of sexual violence in India reveals that legislation alone is not enough. Implementation challenges remain severe, with weak enforcement, poor policing, and slow judicial processes. According to NCRB 2022 data, only 6% of rape cases that went to trial were disposed of, with just 1.6% resulting in conviction and 4.4% in acquittal. The overall conviction rate for rape remains low at around 27–28%, reflecting deep-rooted inefficiencies in investigation, prosecution, and judicial delivery (Reuters).
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
While India’s legal framework has evolved significantly to protect women against sexual offences, it remains inherently gender-specific, excluding male and LGBTQ+ victims from the purview of critical laws such as Section 375 of the IPC (now under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2024) and the POSH Act, 2013. This lack of gender-neutrality creates a significant legal void, where individuals outside the binary are left without statutory protection or redressal mechanisms. Moreover, cases like the Rohtak Sisters and the 2025 Lucknow false allegation case demonstrate the potential for misuse of protective laws, where accusations are weaponized for personal vendetta. Courts, including in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014), have recognized this misuse and called for caution in arrests under laws like Section 498A. However, legal remedies available to the falsely accused—such as Sections 182 and 211 of the IPC—are rarely enforced and offer little real protection.
From a criminological standpoint, this imbalance stems not only from legislative gaps but also from deep-rooted social and psychological factors. Gender stereotypes reinforce the assumption that men are always perpetrators, leading to institutional bias, underreporting, and victim-blaming when men face genuine abuse. Victimology in India has traditionally focused on female survivors, leaving male victims socially isolated and legally invisible. NCRB data (2023) still does not record male sexual assault cases, and there is a severe lack of research or support services for such individuals. Studies from institutions like NIMHANS have highlighted that false allegations and legal harassment can lead to mental health crises, including depression, social withdrawal, and suicide. Additionally, trial by media and biased investigations further distort justice, especially when public outrage overshadows due process. A criminological and legal lens together reveal that without inclusive laws and balanced implementation, the justice system risks perpetuating new forms of discrimination while trying to solve old ones.
Comparison with other countries
While India’s legal framework for sexual offences remains largely gender-specific, many countries have adopted gender-neutral laws to ensure equal protection for all individuals, regardless of gender or sexual orientation. For example, Canada and the United Kingdom define sexual assault in their penal laws as an act committed by any person against any other person, without limiting it to a male perpetrator and a female victim. In Australia, most states have reformed their rape laws to focus on lack of consent and abuse of power, rather than the gender of those involved. The United States also recognizes male and LGBTQ+ victims of rape and sexual abuse under federal and state laws. In contrast, Indian laws like Section 375 IPC and the POCSO Act explicitly describe the perpetrator as male and the victim as female, leaving male and transgender victims without direct legal remedy. This comparative gap highlights the urgency of legal reform in India, not only to prevent the misuse of existing provisions but also to ensure that all survivors of sexual violence, regardless of gender, have access to justice and support.
Absence of legal aid or helplines for men
One of the lesser-known reasons of male victims is not just false accusations but also the lack of institutional support. There are many NGOs or some Mahila Kendra organisations but when it comes to men, there is no such authorities helping them. If a man goes to any organisation for help, he is looked down and mocked at for being a victim as well as accused of playing the victim card. There are few institutes that are gender neutral but are not popular and remain politically, socially unsupported. Without access to affordable legal aid or psychological counselling, many innocent men suffer in silence, further amplifying the injustice. This increased the suicide rate of men and no opportunity to grant them justice.
Lack of nation-wide importance
In a kerela based case- Noushad k. v. State of Kerela (2025), he Kerala High Court granted anticipatory bail to Noushad K, a 57-year-old man wrongly accused of workplace sexual harassment by a female former employee. The woman had alleged that Noushad grabbed her arm with sexual intent. However, the High Court discovered a pen drive containing audio recordings, exposing the woman’s own threats and false statements. Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan explicitly warned against “treating a woman’s complaint as gospel truth,” emphasizing that both the complainant’s and the accused’s versions must be investigated impartially. The court directed the police to examine the pen drive and take legal action if the allegations proved false, clearly asserting that special privileges for women should not be abused to frame innocent men. The Kerala police investigate such matters very carefully, as after this ruling by High Court of Kerela, make video recordings of all evidence before filing charges, consider dual narratives at FIR stage, investigate reciprocal electronic or documentary proof (like audio recordings, CCTV, WhatsApp chats). This helps to reduce false accusations and makes both accused and complainant voices weighed before taking action. While not yet nationwide, this judgement just influenced within Kerala but beyond this no such process is followed.
METHOD
The Indian judiciary has played a vital role in advancing gender justice, especially in the context of sexual violence. Landmark decisions such as Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) laid the groundwork for the enactment of the POSH Act, ensuring safer workplaces for women. Similarly, in Lillu v. State of Haryana (2013), the Supreme Court condemned the “two-finger test” as unconstitutional, marking a shift towards more sensitive handling of rape victims. In Nipun Saxena v. Union of India (2018), the Court emphasized victim confidentiality and laid down rehabilitation guidelines. These judicial efforts reflect a clear commitment to protecting women’s dignity and rights. However, the judiciary has also acknowledged the potential misuse of gender-specific laws, especially in cases involving false allegations or exaggerated claims.
In Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014), the Supreme Court cautioned against the automatic arrest of accused individuals under Section 498A IPC, recognizing that many complaints were filed out of vengeance or spite. Similarly, in Rajesh Sharma v. State of UP (2017), the Court temporarily directed the creation of Family Welfare Committees to screen false cases before arrest—though this was later withdrawn due to implementation issues. Despite these interventions, courts have remained cautious and limited in directly addressing the need for gender-neutral laws, and legislative bodies have been slow to act. Although some High Courts, such as Delhi and Bombay, have expressed concern over the lack of legal recognition for male victims and misuse of legal provisions, these observations have not translated into concrete reforms.
The introduction of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2024, replacing the IPC, was expected to bring substantial change. However, while it streamlined procedures, introduced community service, and digitized some aspects of criminal law, it retained the gender-specific nature of sexual offence laws. This missed opportunity reinforces the existing legal asymmetry. Without statutory changes, even the most progressive judicial interpretations fall short of delivering equal justice. Thus, while the judiciary has made commendable efforts to protect genuine victims and prevent legal misuse, the lack of legislative will continue to hinder the evolution of a more balanced, inclusive legal system.
SUGGESTIONS
To ensure a more balanced and just approach to handling sexual offences, several reforms are necessary. Firstly, laws related to rape, sexual harassment, and workplace misconduct should be made gender-neutral, ensuring protection for all individuals regardless of gender or sexual orientation. Secondly, there must be stronger enforcement of penal provisions for false allegations, such as Sections 182 and 211 of the IPC, along with a system of compensation for the wrongfully accused. Dedicated support cells for male and LGBTQ+ victims, offering psychological, legal, and social assistance, should be established within police stations, universities, and judicial institutions. A mandatory preliminary investigation before arrest in sensitive cases like rape and domestic violence could reduce misuse and prevent reputational harm. Additionally, public awareness campaigns and training programs for police, media, and legal officers should promote a more informed, evidence-based approach to consent, victimhood, and justice. These reforms, taken together, can build a system that upholds truth and fairness for everyone involved. The Kerala based judgement should also be given the nationwide importance which will slightly help both men’s right and women’s safety.
Public policy plays a critical role in shaping a criminal justice system that is not only legally sound but also socially equitable. In the context of sexual violence laws in India, current public policy has heavily focused on the protection of women — which is essential and justified — but this focus must now evolve into a more inclusive and balanced framework. Despite growing awareness around male victimization and legal misuse, public discourse and government schemes remain limited to a single-gender narrative. Policy think tanks, civil society organizations, and law commissions have repeatedly recommended the need for gender-neutral laws, data collection on male victims, and the establishment of support systems for falsely accused individuals. However, these have not yet translated into concrete governmental action.
For public policy to effectively address both women’s safety and men’s rights, a multi-layered approach is needed. This includes curriculum reforms in legal education, awareness campaigns that emphasize consent and fairness, mandatory gender-sensitivity training for law enforcement, and the creation of helplines and crisis cells that are accessible to all genders. Furthermore, collaboration between the Ministry of Law and Justice, the National Commission for Women (NCW), and independent bodies advocating for men’s rights could help generate more balanced, evidence-based legislation. Ultimately, public policy must shift from reactive lawmaking to proactive, inclusive strategies that uphold justice for all citizens—irrespective of gender.
CONCLUSION
Sexual violence remains one of the most serious and persistent challenges to justice, equality, and personal freedom in Indian society. While the legal system has taken important steps to safeguard women—through amendments, fast-track courts, and the creation of gender-specific laws—there is still a pressing need to address the gaps that exclude other victims and unfairly target innocent individuals. The paper has examined how the current framework, though rooted in the objective of protection, sometimes results in legal asymmetry, leading to injustice against male victims, falsely accused men, and LGBTQ+ individuals who remain outside the legal lens.
Scholars and legal commissions have also voiced this concern. In her article Gender-Neutrality in Sexual Offence Laws: The Missing Discourse in India, Shreya Sinha argues that the law’s continued dependence on a male-perpetrator, female-victim model contributes to the invisibility of alternative victim narratives, weakening the credibility and inclusivity of the justice system. The 172nd Report of the Law Commission of India made similar recommendations over two decades ago, advocating for gender-neutral laws that better align with constitutional values and international human rights norms. Despite these efforts, legislative reforms have been slow, and the gap between academic insight and policy implementation remains wide.
Moreover, the growing number of cases involving false allegations—such as the 2025 Lucknow case and Noushad K.’s case in Kerala—demonstrate how blind legal sympathy without proper investigation can result in grave personal, social, and psychological harm. Criminological perspectives reinforce that such harm can be as damaging as the original crimes these laws were created to prevent. Male victims, especially, are often silenced due to societal stigma, lack of support structures, and the absence of legal recognition. India’s public policy has also largely ignored this issue, focusing more on reactive gender protection rather than a balanced, proactive model that safeguards the rights of all individuals.
In order to fulfil the true promise of justice, Indian law and public discourse must move beyond gender binaries and political hesitation. Legal protections must be extended to everyone who needs them—not just based on identity, but based on evidence, harm, and fairness. A reformed framework must acknowledge genuine victims across genders, prevent the misuse of existing laws, and empower the justice system to operate with both sensitivity and scrutiny. Only then can we build a legal and social order where the law does not favor one group over another—but stands equally for all.
REFERENCES
1. Shreya Sinha, Gender-Neutrality in Sexual Offence Laws: The Missing Discourse in India, 12 Indian J. Crim. L. 102, 105 (2022).
2. Law Commission of India, 172nd Report on Review of Rape Laws, Ministry of Law and Justice, Gov’t of India (2000), available at https://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/172ndreport.pdf.
3. National Crime Records Bureau, Crime in India 2022, Ministry of Home Affairs, Gov’t of India, available at https://ncrb.gov.in.
4. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273.
5. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, (1997) 6 SCC 241.
5. Nipun Saxena v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 703.
6. Noushad K. v. State of Kerala, Bail Appl. No. 10379 of 2025 (Ker. HC).
7. “Minor Girl Gang-Raped in Assam’s Dhing,” Times of India (Aug. 2024).
8. “Varanasi Gang-Rape Survivor Names 23 Accused,” The Hindu (Apr. 2025).
9. Rachel Smith, Rape Law Reform in the UK: Gender-Neutral Protections, 19 Ox. J. Crim. L. 214, 216 (2020).
10. David Wells, Consent and Sexual Offences in Australia, 33 Melb. U. L. Rev. 103, 109 (2021).
NAME- AKSHITA
COLLEGE- PANJAB UNIVERSITY