Tag Archives: #women rights

Sex Inequality in Inheritance

To get daily updates, Join Team Attorneylex’s WhatsApp group

Also, check us out on Instagram and Twitter

This article is written by Shrasti Singh, a student of Shri Ramswaroop Memorial University, Lucknow

Introduction

In India, women are given great respect in the society but when we talk about their rights in our society, we get to see inequality in them. One of the right are- Right of inheritance and succession. In India, there is no uniformity in inheritance laws. Different religious communities are governed by their own personal laws like Hindus are governed by Hindu law, Muslims are governed by customary law under the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937. Other than that there is an Indian Succession Act, which apply to all Indian citizen who are not Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Buddhist or Muslim. 

Inheritance and succession are the concept of transferring property and wealth from one generation to the other. Inheritance means the devolution of the property (moveable and non-moveable property), title, rights and duty to another person on the death of an individual either by law of succession and by a will.  There are two type of property-

Subscribe to get access

Read more of this content when you subscribe today.

Conclusion

Thus gender- neutral succession law is need of the society. Women should be not discriminated in any sphere of life including inheritance purpose. Now, the socio –economic status of women in India is considerably changed.  Most of women are involving herself in workforce and contribute in making money and self-acquired property. Women today run their own businesses. Women own 21.5% of all proprietary establishments in the country. Thus provision in Hindu Succession Act should be amended to made law gender neutral based on the modern Indian society in which women is at par with men and follows the constitutional provision of Article 14 and Article 15(1) which talks about right to equality and no discrimination of any kind on the basis of sex, place of birth, religion, race and caste and international convention CDEAW. 

CUSB NATIONAL VIRTUAL CONFERENCE ON THE THEME – “WOMEN AND ACCESS TO JUSTICE THROUGH LEGAL AID” – 26th and 27th AUGUST 2021

ABOUT THE UNIVERSITY

CUSB was established under the Central Universities Act, 2009, with the motto, ‘Collective Reasoning’. The University has been conducting its academic and other activities in its campus which extends over 300 acres at Panchanpur (near Gaya town). The School of Law and Governance is a pioneer in grooming modern day legal professionals with a multidisciplinary edge by providing specialization in Corporate Law, Criminal Law, Labour Law, Constitutional Law, Taxation Law, International Trade & Investment, Banking, Finance & Insurance, IPR, Environment Law and Medical & Forensic Law.

ABOUT LEGAL AID CLINIC

The Legal Aid Clinic of any law school is one of the most important student bodies with an attitude to impart the students an ecstatic experience by providing them with practical experience that goes hand in hand with the academics. The Legal Aid Clinic at Central University of South Bihar under the astute guidance of Faculty Coordinator Dr. Deo Narayan Singh, Assistant Professor, SLG, CUSB is in its 9th year of continuous functioning since its inception. The Legal Aid Clinic has organized prison visits and conducted various social awareness programs in schools and villages. National Conferences & Quiz competitions have also been organized to raise awareness about the importance of legal services among the budding lawyers.

ABOUT THE EVENT

The Legal Aid Clinic, School of Law and Governance, Central University of South Bihar in collaboration with Bihar Legal Network is delighted to officially invite you all to Online National Conference on 26th-27th August, 2021 on the theme of:

Women and Access to Justice through Legal Aid

Time and Date:


Day 1 – From 11:00 to 03:00 PM, 26th August 2021
Day 2 – From 11:00 to 02:05 PM, 27th August 2021

The conference is being organized on the auspicious occasion of Women’s Equality Day with the aim of discussing and deliberating over various interdisciplinary areas and core issues pertaining to the theme. The conference will showcase various aspects of a women’s life with a special emphasis on access to justice and the role of legal aid in achieving the same. The event is set to invite some of the renowned legal luminaries, social and human rights activists who will be educating the students about the status of Indian women and will discuss the effectiveness of the justice delivery system. The conference aims to make the younger generation aware about the hardships faced by the women and how they can play an important role in changing the same to make a better world for all of us.

Registration Fee:

There is No registration Fee

Registration Link:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfFrtA4hFx9Db6-6uNkUQQkiFy588g2VJTRyrOt6VNki5yGwA/viewform

Do Register!!!

Contact Details:

Sudhanshu Sachan
Co-Convener
School of Law and Governance
Central University of South Bihar
Contact NO- 9470218796

For more such opportunities; Join Team Attorneylex’s WhatsApp group to get notified immediately. Also check us out on Instagram and Twitter

SC PASSES INTERIM ORDER ALLOWING WOMEN TO APPEAR FOR NDA EXAM, SLAMS ‘GENDER DISCRIMINATION’

SC Passes Interim Order Allowing Women to Appear for NDA Exam, Slams 'Gender Discrimination'

While issuing the order, the court criticised the Army for not permitting women to take part in the NDA exam.

The present public interest petition raises the issue of violation of Articles 14, 15, 16 and 19 of the Constitution of India by denying the opportunity to eligible and willing female candidates to join the National Defence Academy.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday passed an interim order to allow women to take the admission exam to National Defence Academy (NDA), even as the Centre said women cannot claim violation of any fundamental right for being denied entry as the male cadets trained there do not have any automatic advantage in future career advancement prospects over the women whose only route to enter the Army is by recruitment through short service commission.

The result would be subject to final adjudication of the petitions. A division bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy passed the interim order in a writ petition filed by Kush Kalra seeking permission for women candidates to appear for the NDA exam.

While issuing the order, the court criticised the Army for not permitting women to take part in the NDA exam. When the Army’s counsel submitted that it is a policy decision, the top court said that the said policy decision was based on “gender discrimination”.

The present public interest petition raises the issue of violation of Articles 14, 15, 16 and 19 of the Constitution of India by denying the opportunity to eligible and willing female candidates to join the National Defence Academy and afford them a chance to enrol, train and develop themselves in the National Defence Academy into future leaders of the Indian Armed Forces.

For more Legal Updates; Join Team Attorneylex’s WhatsApp group to get notified immediately. Also check us out on Instagram and Twitter

Women in Indian Army: Wading through Patriarchy and Prejudices

This article is written by Simran Singh Rathi, a student of Army Institute of  Law, Mohali

Prolegomenon

Gender Equality in the simplest of its meaning means when equal rights and opportunities are provided to all in every aspect of life be it; social, economic or educational without any sort of discrimination and, regardless of their gender. We are aware of the prejudices, inequalities and discrimination faced by women in history and the scenario in the 21st century is no different or worth applauding. The utopian goal of achieving gender equality seems a far-fetched dream around the world and India is no exception. Since time immemorial, gender equality is one phenomenon in Indian society, which however hard we try and pledge to achieve, we are still not close to realizing it to the core. The Indian Army, a battle-hardened and robust organization that stands firm in safeguarding our borders and motherland against all odds, is held in veneration by every citizen of our country but a chivalrous and gallant organization like the Army itself is no bereft of the deep-rooted patriarchal mindsets and gender stereotypes that still haunts it and this is when a sad state of affairs emanate. The notions of women being an inferior gender, lacking physical prowess and being too emotional to lead are some of the shocking remarks that women even in the Army have been enduring. The antipathy of the senior male officers, who are the product of their times; where in early days women were expected to get married and tend their families; is put into question as to how can women with similar strengths and capabilities of their male counterparts not lead the troops or does the whole argument stand baseless and just threatens their egos, which the patriarchy in the society has nurtured them with. The Preamble to our Constitution proudly declares that India as a sovereign state provides to its citizens justice, liberty, equality and fraternity but it is fairly evident that we have not been able to uphold these values in its true sense.

Historical Overview

It was during the British reign when in 1888, the Indian Military Nursing Service was formed which laid the bedrock for women in the Armed Forces and on its foundation later on, the role of women in the forces was expanded. The Indian Army nurses played a crucial role in ameliorating the suffering of the soldiers in World War I. Further, with the expansion of inclusion of women in the Army, the Women’s Auxiliary Corps was formed where the women served in non-combat roles such as administration, communication etc. During World War II, women actively participated and served their non-combatant roles with distinction. For the first time in India, it was in the Azad Hind Fauj where women were in active combat roles as a part of the women’s regiment named after Rani of Jhansi.

After independence, the year marking a milestone in taking a step towards gender equality was 1958 when on 1st November for the first-time regular commissions were awarded to women by the Army Medical Corps. Then in the year 1992, the first batch of women officers was inducted and commissioned in the Army through the Women Special Entry Scheme. As per the notification of the Central Government under Section 12 of the Indian Army Act, 1950 on 30th January 1992, women were made eligible to get commissioned as an officer in five branches and cadres of the Indian Army. The tenure fixed for women was for a period of five years and there was no allowance of pension or concessional benefits thereafter. In December 1992, an addition of five more branches was made excluding the combat arms and after being in force for five years, the time limitation was dropped. In 2005, the notification underwent four amendments wherein the validity of the appointment of women officers was extended to 10 years which could further be extended to 14 years and they along with the male officers were brought under the same scheme known as the Short Service Commission.

Scenario across the world

The world has come a long way today from defining and abiding by the rigid gender roles to now women standing shoulder to shoulder to their male counterparts and not only that but outshining them and breaking down the shackles of stereotypes. At present, the majority of the nations induct women in their respective Armed Forces in one form or the other while countries like Libya, The Gambia, Norway and Sweden have conscripted men and women on the same official pre-requisite conditions. In 2016, Unites States lifted the Pentagon’s ban on allowing women to serve on the frontline yet they are not deployed in direct combat. In 2018, UK allowed the women officers to serve in the elite special forces. Few of the countries like Canada, Denmark, Norway and Israel are the ones who’ve been inducting women to serve in a full combat capacity, ensuring total inclusion. Although many countries allow women to be an active part of the forces still the problems of gender parity are evident in foreign armies as well.

Unending legal battles

The women in the Army have been fighting the battle for parity for long and the first step to ensure the same was taken as early as in the year 2003 after 11 years of the notification that enrolled women as officers in the Army. A PIL was filed then by practicing advocate Babita Puniya, to grant permanent commission to women officers and shun the prevalent gender inequalities. It was followed by few women officers like Major Leena Gaurav and Lt Col Seema Singh who approached the Court seeking a permanent commission in the year 2006 and 2007 respectively.

In 2008, women were finally granted permanent commission prospectively but that too only in two departments which was the Army Education Corps and the Judge Advocate General which was challenged by Maj Sandhya Yadav and others owing to the disparity in granting the permanent commission to the officers of specific Corps. In 2010, Delhi High Court took a step ahead and heard together all the pending petitions regarding this issue and held that the women should be offered permanent commission after 5 years of service along with the concessional benefits which too was challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court but was upheld.

In 2019, an order was issued by the Centre wherein permanent commission was granted to women in other eight services which were Signals, Engineers, Army Air Defence, Mechanical Engineers, Electronics and Army Aviation and had to be applied prospectively. 

In 2020, the long and arduous battle for permanent commission for women in Army resulted in victory when the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its landmark verdict in the case of Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya & Ors. ruled that all women officers commissioned on the SCC basis were eligible for permanent commission and command posts in the non-combat units. It was held that due to the inherent stereotypes and biases, women should not be bereft of equality in a reverent organization like Army. 

Although this judgement was welcomed with opened arms yet, in 2021 the case of Lt Col Nitisha v. Union of India argued over the pertinent issues where even though the abovementioned judgement granted women permanent commission yet the problems of discrimination still persisted owing to the unjust general instructions to be met by the women officers for permanent commission.

Equality still not a reality

In the Army, for the women officers, it isn’t the enemies who act as a detrimental obstruction rather it is the deep-rooted patriarchal mindsets that pull women down and withhold them howbeit, they have carved out a niche for themselves and are now moving not only together but ahead of their male counterparts which have been duly upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the year 2020 in the case of Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya & Ors as it was held that leaving women bereft of permanent commission is a sheer violation of Article 14 and Article 16(1) of the Constitution that provides every citizen with the right to equality and the equal opportunities to be available to all citizens in matters of public employment respectively. It was also held that a complete ban on assuming command roles cannot be accepted since it is again violative of the right to equality. The judgement was given in favour of equality which will without any doubt provide women already serving in the Army and those aspiring to join, an impetus whereby they can realize their best selves and boost their morale. The abhorrence shown by courts towards gender stereotypes and prejudices gave a hope that it would also act as an anchor in steering the future course of things to ensure complete gender parity in the Indian Army.

But all hopes went to vain and the taste of victory couldn’t last long for women officers in the Army as just after a year of this celebrated and much-applauded judgement, in 2021, the criteria for evaluation for women officers to get the permanent commission set by Army was termed as “irrational” and “arbitrary” as the court observed that in no way can “perverse equality” exist in the Army in the case of Lt Col Nitisha v. Union of India. The criteria in itself reflected the gender-discrimination where a 45-year-old women officer was required to meet similar standards in terms of medical fitness to that of a 25-year-old male officer which was blatantly prejudicial and demonstrated the patriarchal mentality, where Army was still being considered as an all-men club. The court considered it a farce to apply laws equally to unequal parties when they are well-established to cater to the male standpoint.

Conclusion

The journey foe women officers in the Indian Army so far has been a bumpy ride full of ups and downs but they have come a long way too as we moved forward with the advent of the demand for equality in form of the feminist movement, we saw women being an active part of the Independence movements, Azad Hind Fauj and World Wars, after which the need for recognition of their selfless service rose as women had proved their mettle. Yet it took India forty-five years after Independence to induct women officers in the Army and the struggles for them since then have not waned as they still are in pursuit of parity which must conclude in meeting the ends of equality. To achieve equality in its true sense we require a paradigm shift where we have to do away with all the ingrained patriarchy and chauvinism, unfounded biases and inbuilt stereotypical notions and only then will we be able to savour the quintessence of equality and realize the dream of men and women being placed at the same pedestal in the society without any discrimination.

https://lawmentor.in/2022/03/19/women-in-indian-army-wading-through-patriarchy-and-prejudices/

THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE v. BABITA PUNIYA & Ors (2020 SCC ONLINE 200)

This Case Summary is written by Ritika Srivastava, a student at The ICFAI University, Dehradun

SYNOPSIS

The Constitution of India enumerates various provisions for women for their upliftment and to bring gender equality in the society. But it is still a question whether women are treated equally on par with men after 74 years of Independence. The answer is NO. India being one the largest democracy but Gender stereotypes always creates obstacles in the path of women. There is several of gender discrimination from which women are fighting since birth till the date of their death, they are bound in such stereotype but one of the battles ended in the favour of them in the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment namely “The Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya & Ors. The honourable court ordered to grant Permanent Commission (PC) in 10 non-combat services at three month and further stated that women are now eligible to hold command posts by tire the existing ceiling. This judgment gives women an equal opportunity in the Indian Army by providing them a long-term job security.

BACKGROUND

Section 12 of the Army Act, 1950 defined the Ineligibility of females for enrolment or employment. It says that “No female shall be eligible for enrolment or employment in the regular Army, except in such cops, department, branches or other body forming part of, or attached to any portion of, the regular Army as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf:

Provided that nothing contained in this section shall affect the provision of any law for the time being in force providing for the raising and maintenance of any service auxiliary to the regular Army or any branch thereof in which females are eligible for enrolment or employment”.

On 30th January 1992, a notice issued by the Union government in favour of female candidates that they are granted Short Service Commissions (SSC) for five year for the department such as Army Postal Service, Judge Advocate General’s Department, Army Education Corps, Army Ordinance Corps and Service Corps. And after few months in a same year on 31st December, five more department such as Mechanical, Signal and Electrical engineering, Engineers, Regiment of Artillery and Intelligence Corps.

FACTS OF THE CASE

In the year 2003, Babita Puniya, an advocate filed a writ petition in the nature of PIL before the Delhi High Court for granting Permanent Commission (PC) to military women who recruited as Short Service Commission (SSC) officers. And apart from this petition, many other petitions were filed by the women officers for the same and tagged their petition with Babita’s petition.

In the year 2005, the Minister of Defence declared that validity of the appointment scheme of the Indian Army regarding women officers being extended.

On 20th July 2006, a further notification issued which allows the SSC women officers to serve for maximum 14 years. In a same year on 16th October, Major Leena Gaurav again filed a writ petition challenging the terms and conditions issued by the Minister of Defence on 20th July for seeking to grant Permanent Commission (PC) for Women officers. In the next year (2007) Lt. Colonel Seema Singh also filed petition for the same issue of granting PC.

In the year 2008, the Union Government granted PC to SSC officers in some of the departments such as in JAG and Army Education Corps. Later, Major Sandhya Yadav and others challenged this notification that PC was granted to those who appointed after the date of implementation of this notification and only in two departments.

Delhi High Court flooded with the petition seeking to grant PC to the women officers. In 12th March 2010, Delhi High Court heard all the petition and held that PC should be granted to the women who were already recruited as SSC in all departments after five years of service. In July the Army appeared before the Supreme Court challenging this judgment but Supreme Court upheld the judgment of Delhi High Court.

On 2nd September 2011, again appeal was made in Supreme Court which held the given judgment to be continued. In 2018, the court was asked to review the order of granting PC to women in the Army.

At last on 15th February 2019, the Union Government issued a notification for PC to SSC women in the Army of eight combat support services and women officers were only serve on staff appointments. 

ISSUES RAISED

  • Whether the order issue by the Centre on 15th February 2019 should be implemented?
  • Whether women in the Indian Army should be granted Permanent Commission (PC)?
  • What are the terms and conditions determine the Women officers in the Indian Army?

CONTENTIONS

The argument advanced by the Petitioner

  1. It was argued that the judgment delivered by the Delhi High Court was unable to consider the relevant provisions under section 10 and section 12 of the Army Act, 1950.
  2. It was argued that the centre has to consider the risk involved in the services of the Army officers especially to the women (child care issues, maternity issues and revolt areas or in any field). As stated in case Union of India v. PK Chaudhary.
  3. It was argued that the border areas have less facilities and posting of women in such areas is not sensible because of hygiene.
  4. It was argued in the Written Note by the Union of India by referring once again domestic obligations, motherhood, pregnancy and differences in the physical abilities as compare to all-male units.
  5. It was argued about the considerable benefits of pension to the women in the army who served continued even after fourteen year notice issued on 15th February 2019.

The argument advanced by the Respondent

  1. It was argued that there is nothing new about the concern regarding to privacy, women of all ages are still recruited on such post where risk factors is high, no sanitation in force headquarters, field areas, warfare areas and so on.
  2. It was argued that the Centre promotes the discriminatory policy regarding granting of PC to SSC women officers and also lower their position to that of a jawan.
  3. It was argued that the Centre claimed the presence of women establish a negative effect on the unit cohesion. Women should provided equal opportunity as men, added.
  4. It was argued that women served the nation same as the male counterparts do then why they are left in the lurch without pension and promotion.
  5. It was argued that it about 30% of the women officers is exposed to combative environment and aware about risk factor present in war zone.

RULES

  • Article 14 of the Indian Constitution (Equality before Law).
  • Article 15 (1) of the Indian Constitution (Principle of non-discrimination on the basis of sex.
  • Article 16 (1) of the Indian Constitution (Equality of opportunity for all the citizen of India in the matters of public employment).
  • Article 33 of the Indian Constitution (Power of the Parliament to modify the right conferred by this Part in their application).
  • Army Act, 1950.

FINDINGS 

On the basis of the facts and arguments advanced by petitioner and respondent, the court held the following:

  1. The option shall be given to all the women officers currently recruited as SSC officers.
  2. All the women officers serving as SSC shall be considered for granting PCs regardless whether any of them crossed fourteen years or twenty years of service.
  3. The considerable benefits shall be granted to the SSC women officers who are in service and even after as pensionable service.
  4. The specialization choice shall be available to all the women officers during they are opting for the grant in PCs alike male counterparts.
  5. The judgment delivered by the Delhi High Court is affirmed.
  6. The term “in various staff appointments only” and “on staff appointment only” mentioned under para 5 and para 6 of the order issued on 15th February 2019 respectively shall not be enforced with respected to PC of women.

REASONING

The Supreme Court headed by Justice D.Y Chandrachud challenged the issue presented by the Union government and stated that they have ingrained in stereotypical assumptions that domestic works are the responsibilities of women only and added that such order against a specific gender clearly violates their fundamental right guaranteed under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. And not granting PC to the women officers clearly violated their Fundamental Rights provided under Article 14, 15 and 16. Justice Chandrachud said although Article 33 of the Indian Constitution permits restriction on Fundamental Right in armed forces and it is mentioned that it could be restricted up to the extent that it is essential to maintain the adequate discharge of duty and discipline. There are certain conditions laid down granting PCs to SSC women officers. Justice Chandrachud also said that “Constitution is itself feminist, as the main function off feminism is to distort social Hierarchies and so is of constitution.”

CRITICAL ANALYSIS

Indian Court has always come forth to protect the rights of women and this judgment again proven that our court stands up for the right of the women which were not granted to them. It is genuinely a progressive judgment and literally safeguards its place as a guardian of the constitution.

The fundamental rights guaranteed under Indian Constitution would granted to us if not followed by the quotes in letter and spirit. There were number of cases where the courts have extended fundamental right such as in Chairman Railway Board and others v. Chandrima Das (Mrs) and others and C.B. Muthamma v. Union of India to Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India. 

CONCLUSION

“It is not enough to proudly state that women officers are allowed to serve the nation in the Armed Forces when the true picture of their service conditions tells a different story”. Supreme Court on Indian’s Army failure to enact the judgment which allows PC for women officers. This judgment undoubtedly appreciatable and commendable but it still left us with a question whether do we the holder of right. There is a need to ask our right from other institutions.

Article 39 of the Indian Constitution empowers the state to work for securing equality for men and women and a right to proper means of livelihood. This whole issue arises from the stereotypical idea against women that they are physically weaker than men, not enough efficient to fight and are not capable to face such situations. This mindset should be needed to change because it violates firstly their rights and also break them mentally and emotionally.

Secretary, Ministry Of Defence V. Babita Puniya And Ors.

This Case Summary is written by Apoorva Singh & Ananya Singh, students of Galgotias University

SYNOPSIS

Gender equality has always been a point of discussion. In this case, we talk about gender equality in the armed forces. This case discusses granting permanent commission (hereinafter PC) to female officers who were enrolled via Short Service Commission in the year 1992. The bench of the Supreme Court consisting of Justice DY Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi gave a rebuff to the contention raised by the army for denying PC to women. They criticized the army’s assumption about the ascribed role of women and labelled them as highly stereotypical. The judgement delivered by the bench is laudable, and have become an illustration of the equal outlook of our judiciary. 

BACKGROUND

The case commences from section 12 of the Army Act, 1950 which restricted the enrolment of women in the army, except in selected branches. This leads to the Union government releasing a notification wherein women were allowed to join certain branches for five years. The period which at the initiation was 5 years, was extended to 10 years and later on to 14 years. 

FACTS OF THE CASE 

On 30th January 1992, the Centre released a notification wherein women candidates were granted Short Service Commission. They were allowed to join selected branches of the army. Women who were appointed through SSC demanded equal status as their male counterparts and thereby seek PCs in the army.

In 2003, a writ petition was instituted before Delhi High Court by practising advocate, Babita Puniya for enabling PC to women officers. Many women raised the same issue so their petition was later on attached with Babita’s petition.

In 2006, in a policy revision Centre allowed women officers to serve for a period of a maximum 14 years as SSC officers. Later, Major Leena Gaurav and Lt. Col. Seema Singh challenged the court for the issue which came previously in the same year.

In 2008, the Ministry of Defense issued a circular enabling grant of PCs to women, but only prospectively. 

In 2010, Delhi High Court assembled all the petitions and administered the centre to grant PC to SSC women officers. Army moved Supreme Court challenging this order but Supreme Court upheld the order of Delhi HC.

In 2019, Centre brought notification granting PC to women officers of eight combat support services but only prospectively. The permanent commission applied to only those females who were employed after this request. 

ISSUES

  • Whether women should be granted Permanent Commission in the Indian Army?
  • Should the guidelines given by the Government of India dated 15th February 2019 be implemented? 
  • What are the conditions governing the Women Officers in the Indian Army?

CONTENTIONS

ARGUMENTS BY APPELLANTS

Appellant i.e. the secretary and ministry of defence’s contentions were taken forward by the Union of India.

  • According to the Union of India, the Delhi High court successfully slipped up sections 10 and 12 of the Army Act, 1950. These sections clearly state that the grant of PC is at the hands of the President of India and no women can seek employment apart from in areas government may seem fit. Therefore, no mandamus can be adduced in the court.
  • Under Government Policy dated 15th February 2019, the benefit of pension is to be bestowed to those women officers who have completed fourteen years of service.
  • Strengthened by section 12 of the Army act and Article 33 of the Constitution, query concerning recruitment and grant of PC is termed as policy considerations and are governed by the executives. The scope of judicial review in command and tenure has been limited as held in the Union of India and anr. V. Lt. Col. P.K. Choudhary and Ors.
  • Union of India believes that army work is unfit for women as it carries “inherent risks” but ironically it has opposite thoughts for males.
  • They cited that women already have to deal with pregnancy, motherhood and childcare, they won’t be able to do justice with their job as a soldier.  
  •  The employment of more women officers into PC’s would disturb the organizational structure, as per the contention of the Union of India.
  • The submission note of the Union of India has stated “physiological limitations” on the employability of Women Officers which comes with the challenges of motherhood, confinement and childcare. 
  • The placement of Women Officers in border areas is not preferable because the area lacks elemental hygiene.

ARGUMENTS BY RESPONDENTS 

  • Despite there being no stay order against the judgment of the Delhi High Court, no steps were taken to grant PCs to lady officials in the army.
  • Bashing on above submissions, respondents furthered that only 4% women are employed in army whereas male holds a total of 96% employment in the army. Will this not count as prejudicial?
  • Union of India stated that the existence of women in the army will destruct unit cohesion. The respondent in return said it would not happen only if the army treats women equally.
  • Women officers have been left high and dry without any kind of pensionary privilege in comparison to their male equivalent.
  • Even though there are vacancies of officers in support services, they are not allotting to women but those are filled by Retired Male officers of colonel rank.
  • Appellant professes that woman officers are posted to those areas where the probability of conflict is almost a zilch while conversely 30% of all women officers are exposed to the warzone.
  • Despite qualifying every mandatory course as their male equivalent, they are not able to seek PCs. This biased nature lowers the status of women to that of a jawan. 
  • The army does not have a rule on which officers seeking PC imperatively allotted troops. If women officers meet qualifying criteria they must be promoted to the next rank just as their male equivalent.

FINDINGS

  • Centre asserted that it is the woman who has the domestic duties on them. This deep-seated stereotype approach of the appellant infringes Art.14 of the women.
  • Court dissented with the appellant on the hygiene and sanitization argument by stating that already 30% of women are exposed to minimal hygiene and warzone area.

REASONING

  • Justice Chandrachud detected those dominant mindsets who suffer from a deep-seated stereotype about the role of women in society. While criticizing this opinion of the appellant, Justice Chandrachud held that women should not be deprived of opportunities merely because dominant mindsets of the army have a discriminatory approach towards them. 
  • Art.33 permits parliament to restrict fundamental rights of armed forces only to the extent that it ensures the proper discharge of duty and discipline within them. However, the partitioning in giving the PC status to female officers cannot be called a proper discharge of duty. Thus, the army could not take the protection of Article 33.
  • Not granting PC to female officers is their infringement of Art.14, 15 and 16.
  • The Court held that the policy decision of the Union of India dated 25thFeburary 2019 that allows Permanent Commission to women officers in 10 streams is as per sec.12 of the Army Act, 1950.

DISPOSITION/ JUDGMENT

The Supreme Court judgment is subject to certain conditions that are listed below:-

  • All-female officers of SSC are eligible to PC putting aside the fact they have crossed 14 or 20 years of service. 
  • The statements stating “in various staff appointments only” and “on staff appointments only” in both Para 5 and 6 shall not be enforced. 
  • Female officers from now on receive privileges like pension or promotion benefits like their male equivalent.
  • Women who crossed 20 years of service and have not granted PC shall retire on pension terms.
  • Women SSC officers shall have the choice of opting for PC just as their male counterparts.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS

The union in submissions asserted that Art. 33 of the Indian Constitution empower Parliament to restrict fundamental rights of armed forces but the argument was rejected by Justice Chandrachud. In lieu, he said that Art. 33 are not intended to restrict someone’s fundamental right up to the time proper discharge and discipline is maintained.

While evaluating Union submissions, Justice Chandrachud inferred the judgment by reckoning the interpretation of sex, understood regarding socially constructed gender, in NALSA and Navtej Singh Johar judgments. Herewith, the court stated that traditional gender roles, such as that a woman’s primary responsibility is domestic, can be considered biased under articles 15 and 16. 

The judgment should be applauded as it has resulted in gender equality and simultaneously shattered gender stereotypes and discrimination prevailing in the dominant mindsets of the Union. But will it have any influence outside the purview of the armed forces? Judgments like Triple Talaq and Sabrimala have gained an important battleground as it involves religious personal law. While affairs on public employment like the Puniya case may carry a small weightage but it surely depicts a word that Court will always work against gender stereotypes.

CONCLUSION

India, i.e. Bharat, cannot only be formed on the shoulders of her ‘Shiva’ but also on the shoulders of her ‘Parwati’ and then only Bharat can be a ‘Shakti’:

The Indian Army holds a prestigious reputation in the eyes of the public. An equal gender ratio will enhance the reputation of the Indian army. Many countries are changing their attitude not just to promote equality, but also because they need the skills that women have. It’s been a long fight, dating back to 1992, but it finally paid off when the Supreme Court granted permanent commission status to women officers in the Indian armed forces and made them eligible for command positions, allowing them to perform all types of military roles – full combat, combat support, and combat command. This verdict will serve as a milestone in curbing the gender ratio in our Armed forces. But has this verdict cured all intricacies women face in society? We are farfetched from the real battle, but we can put our feet up as the difference has initiated. This verdict will surely boost the confidence of women to chase their dreams instead of bothering about the patriarchal society. In the end, the judgment is undoubtedly laudable but we have a long way off.

 

Hadiya Marriage Case

           

Facts:-

The petitioner (father )filed a case on the ground that Hadiya (originally Akhila Ashokan) was deceived into marrying her husband, Mr. Shafin Jahan and forcibly converted to Islam. I.e, He alleged that Hadiya had been misled and forced to become a Muslim.

Question of law:- 

  • Does the High Court have the power to annul the marriage of an adult under Article 226?
  • Does marriage being the most crucial decision of life, can be taken only with the active involvement of her parents, and no legal adult consent is necessary?

Held:- 

  • The writ of habeas corpus is ‘a great constitutional privilege’ or ‘the first security of civil liberty.’ It is a remedy against illegal detention, which affects the liberty and freedom of the detainee. In this case, the High Court misused the habeas corpus. When Hadiya appeared before the High Court, she stated that she was not under illegal confinement. The High Court has no power to decide the ‘just’ way of life or ‘correct’ course of living for Hadiya. 
  • Parens patriae is the power of the State to intervene against an abusive or negligent parent or guardian. The State acts as the parent of such an individual. The courts can invoke this role only in exceptional cases where the individual is either mentally incompetent, underage, or has either no parent/legal guardian or abusive one.
  •  The right to marry a person of one’s choice is integral to Article 21. The High Court was wrong in using its powers under Article 226 to annul Hadiya’s marriage with Shafin Jahan.

Submitted By: Priya Singh

https://lawmentor.in/2022/03/13/hadiya-marriage-case/

HEALTH AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS OF WOMEN: A COMMENT ON THE ABORTION LAWS

This article is written by Abhishek Yadav, Maharaja Agrasen Institute of Management Studies, Rohini

Introduction

Meaning of abortion– According to the medical terms, abortion is the process of complete or partial separation of the products of conception from the uterine wall complete or partial expulsion from the uterine cavity before the age of viability. The meaning of abortion is the termination of pregnancy by any way or any method ( induced or spontaneous) before the fetus is sufficiently developed to survive independently (fetus which is less than 20 days of pregnancy).1

One more definition is when the delivery of the fetus/baby that is less than 500 grams. This is a technique to remove a developing Embryo or Foetus from the maternal uterus. Abortion is a term of pre mature termination of pregnancy prior to birth. It is a technique of removing a developing foetus or embryo from the maternal uterus.
Reproductive rights are the legal rights of a women which gives them the freedom to control their own reproduction system or pregnancy. And this right also includes the rights to make their own decision regarding her reproduction free from any discrimination and violence.
In India, the age of viability is maximum of 28 weeks, and the cause of sudden abortion in most of the cases are not known. In most of the village areas of Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan sex determination is a common practice which ends up in the form of abortion if the child to be born is female. It is a criminal offence but even after that this act still in practice.

Few common reasons behind that are:
 The practice of dowry system
 Sex with a minor girl
 Prime preference is given to a male child
 The financial burden on the family of the girl child
 Rape victims


Types of Abortion

Abortion generally evokes an image of “induced abortion”. There are mainly two types of abortion and those are:

Spontaneous – (according to medical author William c. Shield Jr., MD, FACP, FACR) A miscarriage, that is, any pregnancy that is not viable (the fetus cannot survive) or in which the fetus is born before the 20th week of pregnancy. Spontaneous abortion occurs in at least 15-20% of all recognized pregnancies and usually takes place before the 13th week of pregnancy.

Induced – as we discussed spontaneous abortion is purely accidental but induced abortion is opposed to spontaneous abortion and it happens because of some form of external interference or intervention ( physical, medical or surgical) starts and complete the process of extraction/expulsion of the product of conception.

Types of spontaneous abortion are: Threatened, inevitable, missed abortion, complete abortion, incomplete abortion, septic.

Now types of induced abortion are: Therapeutic and non Therapeutic
Abortion laws in India.

This would be incorrect to say that abortion was illegal in India until the regulations through the MTP act came into force. Therapeutic abortions to save the mother’s life were always illegal. In India Medical Terminology of Pregnancy or induced abortion is permitted under sec. 312 of Indian Penal Code and Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act. Even after that 4 to 5 million abortions takes place annually in India, more than 2/3 (two-thirds) of them are illegal and performed outside the statutory provisions of the Medical Terminology of Pregnancy act by unskilled, untrained persons and are performed under highly unhygienic conditions. Under section 45 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, including abortion or causing “a women with a child to miscarry” is a criminal offence and punishable under IPC for both physician who does it or the women who procure it, there is only exception that when it is done in ‘good faith to save the life of a women’.

Women’s are also the prime part of the society for today and for the coming generations. They should be safe. The ICPD has mentioned in their report that women’s right to sexual health and reproduction as being the key to the women’s health. Every year thousands of women’s die due to unsafe abortion.
For insuring the safety of the women’s in the society Government has introduced various scheme’s for girls like national nutrition mission i.e. Poshan Abhiyan and Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao where its aim to save the girl child and educate her.


Constitutional Provisions
If we go through with the Constitution we will find that the framers of the Constitution had already enlisted Right to Health in the DPSP (Directive Principal of State Policy) which dictates that This is duty of the state of provide nutrition, rehabilitation, health services and general awareness and after that the judiciary plays a very vital role and it has been enforced as a Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Constitution ( Right to Live with Human Dignity). The right to health also includes right to clean environment, right to food, reproductive rights, right to liberty, health and safety emergency health care etc. If any of these fundamental rights gets violate it can easily be taken to the court by filling a writ petition Supreme Court and High Court.


Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971
This medical termination of pregnancy act passed by the parliament in 1971 and this act came into force on April 1972. This act was amended in the year of 2002. In the act basically the conditions mentioned under which a pregnancy can be monitored, terminated and supervised by the Chief Medical Officer of the district. The medical termination of pregnancy act has enlarged the scope of legal abortion and this act also made safe abortion available to women up to 20 weeks of pregnancy under strict rules and regulations to ensure safety and prevent it’s misuse.


In the country, unwanted pregnancies also the main reason which set forth problems and which ultimately amount to fatal consequences to the women. In the country like India if the pregnancy is out of wedlock so considered disgraceful. After the MTP act,1971 passed it is legal now to have abortion in the country. Any women if she wants to or seeking an abortion is permissible under this law to do so. Despite several policies and laws, thousands of women dies every year due to this unsafe abortion process. This MTP act, 1971 consists of 8 sections dealing with various aspects like place, time and circumstances under which a pregnancy can be terminated or it may be terminated by a registered medical practitioner. The Medical termination of pregnancy act, 1971 has liberalized the availability of abortion by extending it when the pregnancy is going to cause grave physical or mental injury to the mother and by including rape- contraceptive and induced failure caused pregnancies.


Penal provisions Under sec 312 and 316 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 deal with penal provisions related to illegal abortion. These sections deal with offences related with unborn child and human body.
Sec 312 deal with if a person who knowingly causes a miscarriage to women with a child will be punished with imprisonment and fine for 3 years or both. It is a non cognizable and bailable offence.
Sec 316 is a cognizable, and non bailable under this section the offender does not necessarily cause abortion or does any thing which can kill the unborn baby, but according to this section even if there is no intention or desire by the offender still he/she liable or guilty for the offence.
Sec 316 deals with causing the death of an unborn baby by this act amounting to culpable homicide.

In the case of Suchita srivastava vs V krishnan 2, SC held that the state has the obligation or duty to ensure reproductive rights as component of her Fundamental Right article 21 that is personal liberty, dignity and privacy.

Conclusion
In the recent time the abortion method have become much safer. According to the several reports every year women suffer due to unwanted pregnancy specially in the rape victims cases. The Right to health if it does not promise better health to all the women it defeats its purpose and the government should understand and take the action’s for the same and launch the schemes related to health care. A women should have the proper right on her own body. Because of unsafe abortion it results in internal injury and infections which is because of the lack of proper awareness and knowledge. It is the duty of the society to make our women strong instead of making our women week so that they can fight back and do not lose hope.


Reference:

  1. https://www.drgandhali.com/p/20/types-of-abortion
  2. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5845 of 2009 (arising out of S.L.P. © No. 17985 of 2009)