Indian state's polygamy ban divides some Muslim women

Muslim women are seen during a mass marriage ceremony, in which, 51 Muslim couples took their wedding vows, in Mumbai

RIGHTS IN MULTI-RELIGIOUS SOCIETY

Reporting by Rupam Jain; Editing by William Mallard

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. , opens new tab

Supporters of India's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) carry a hoarding of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Minister of Home Affairs Amit Shah for celebrations in Ahmedabad

India gives initial nod to buy 15 Airbus C-295, 6 refuelling aircraft

The Indian government on Friday gave initial approval for the purchase of 15 maritime patrol aircraft from Airbus and six air-refuel aircraft, officials said.

NFL: Super Bowl LVIII-Kansas City Chiefs Celebration

In the evolving landscape of reproductive rights, the intersectionality of gender identities and abortion rights in India demands critical examination. Recognising the multifaceted challenges faced by transgender individuals in accessing healthcare, this essay explores the imperative for specific legal provisions safeguarding their reproductive autonomy. In a country where societal norms often marginalise transgender communities, the discourse on abortion rights becomes inherently linked to broader conversations on inclusivity and justice.

Yet, within the existing legal framework, affording transgender individuals the right to abortion is attainable, a standpoint this essay contends.

What are the issues faced by the trans community?

The presence of transgender individuals in the Indian subcontinent can indeed be traced back to ancient times, as evidenced by mentions in ancient Hindu texts. Despite this historical acknowledgement, contemporary Indian society continues to pose significant challenges for the transgender community, rendering them one of the most vulnerable groups.

Stigmatisation surrounding transgender identity remains pervasive in today’s society, making it difficult for transgender individuals to assimilate into mainstream culture. This social stigma often forces them to live in isolation, estranged from broader societal acceptance. Discrimination and oppression against the transgender community persist, exacerbating their vulnerability. Recently, it surfaced in the form of a petition filed by a transwoman teacher in the Indian Supreme Court against her dismissal allegedly because of her transgender identity.

Moreover, a pressing issue faced by transgender individuals is the lack of access to proper medical care . Transgenders often encounter difficulties in obtaining appropriate healthcare services, which should encompass not only general medical needs but also specific healthcare related to gender identity.

History of transgender rights in India

The NALSA judgment, officially known as the National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India , marked a significant milestone in recognising and affirming the rights of transgender individuals in India. In this landmark ruling, the Supreme Court acknowledged the need for legal recognition of the transgender community.

The Court’s directives encompassed various measures for transgender individuals, including the establishment of separate HIV Sero-surveillance Centres, the resolution of social challenges without requiring gender confirmation surgeries, the provision of medical care and distinct facilities, the formulation of social welfare schemes, the promotion of public awareness for inclusivity, and the restoration of respect and historical significance transgenders in society.

However, one key aspect of the judgment was the shift from a ‘biological test’ to a ‘psychological test’ for identifying gender. The court emphasised that gender identity should not be solely determined by biological factors but should also consider an individual’s psychological sense of self. This change in perspective aimed to provide a more inclusive and comprehensive understanding of gender. Moreover, the NALSA judgment upheld the right of transgender individuals to self-identify their gender. The Supreme Court directed both the Central and State governments to legally recognise the self-identified gender of transgenders, emphasising that any form of discrimination against them would violate their fundamental rights.

By recognising the rights of transgenders and advocating for their legal recognition, the NALSA judgment played a crucial role in promoting inclusivity and safeguarding the fundamental rights of transgender individuals in India.

A welcome step by the Indian Supreme Court

The judgment in X v. Health & Family Welfare Department , particularly the statement authored by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, has significantly brought abortion rights into the spotlight in India.

The case specifically dealt with the abortion rights of ‘unmarried’ women under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003 (MTP Rules), and the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (MTP Act). MTP Act and MTP Rules are the legislations which lay down the laws and rules for abortions in India. In this case, the court affirmed that unmarried and single women have the reproductive right to abortion under section 3(2)(b) of the MTP Act, which allows termination by a registered medical practitioner for a prescribed category of women, as per the MTP Rules, if the pregnancy duration is between twenty and twenty-four weeks, provided at least two registered medical practitioners are involved. Similarly, it was held that Rule 3B of the MTP Rules explicitly includes unmarried and single women under 3B(c), addressed under the ‘change of marital status’ category. Rule 3B lists down the category of women eligible for abortion as per section 3(2)(b) of the MTP Act.

However, what stirred controversy and drew attention to the case was the inclusive language used by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud. The statement, “…we use the term ‘woman’ in this judgment as including persons other than cis-gender women who may require access to safe medical termination of their pregnancies,” marked a crucial departure from traditional interpretations. By expressly including individuals beyond cis-gender women in the definition of ‘woman,’ the judgment sought to expand the scope of the MTP Rules and MTP Act to encompass even transgender individuals.

Although the appellant’s prayers did not specifically address the issue of gender, the Supreme Court’s proactive stance in interpreting and expanding the scope of the MTP Act can be seen as an instance of judicial activism.

This judicial activism is considered essential as it broadens the ambit of the MTP Act, ensuring that transgender individuals have access to proper medical facilities and can exercise their reproductive rights without hindrance. The court’s decision reflects a commitment to inclusivity and underscores the importance of adapting legal interpretations to contemporary understandings of gender and reproductive rights.

A case for transgender abortion rights

Apart from the X v. Health & Family Welfare Department ruling, which broadened abortion rights for unmarried and single transgender individuals, there exists the potential for the extension of these rights to encompass all categories of transgender persons, mirroring the existing rights afforded to cisgender counterparts.

The definition of ‘woman’ remains unspecified in both the MTP Rules and the MTP Act. Rule 3B of the MTP Rules outlines the ‘categories of women’ eligible for abortion under section 3(2)(b) of the MTP Act but does not explicitly address whether this includes transgender individuals. In cases of ambiguity, the ‘mischief rule’ is applied, akin to the ‘purposive’ interpretation of a law, which seeks to identify the intended remedy for the law’s mischief or the purpose.

The mischief aimed to be addressed by the MTP Act was the liberalisation of abortion provisions for health, humanitarian, and eugenic reasons, as stated in the Statement of Object and Reasons of the MTP Act. Notably, the Act and Rules refrain from specifying ‘woman’ as exclusively referring to biological gender, utilising the term more broadly.

Furthermore, drawing from the NALSA judgment, which acknowledges that transgenders can self-identify as men, women, or third gender, it is arguable that transgenders identifying as women should fall within the purview of the MTP Act. Also, the same judgment emphasises the responsibility of Central and State Governments to ensure proper medical care for transgenders. Given that abortion is an integral aspect of medical care, it can be contended that the government should extend facilities for abortion to transgender individuals.

Additionally, the prohibition against discrimination under section 3(b) of Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 explicitly states that no person or establishment is allowed to discriminate against a transgender individual, particularly concerning healthcare services. This includes actions such as denying or discontinuing healthcare services or subjecting transgender individuals to unfair treatment in the realm of healthcare. Moreover, the government is mandated under section 15 of the same Act to address transgender healthcare by reviewing medical curricula for their specific needs and facilitating increased access to hospitals and healthcare institutions.

The way forward

It is imperative for the government to introduce an amendment to the MTP Act and MTP Rules to explicitly incorporate transgender individuals within the scope of these legislations. Drawing inspiration from the recent post-colonial criminal law legislation Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , where ‘transgender’ is included under the term ‘gender’ under section 2(10), a parallel approach could be adopted within the MTP Rules and MTP Act. This would entail incorporating transwomen within the definition of ‘women,’ ensuring equitable reproductive rights.

Moreover, adopting such an approach aligns seamlessly with the progressive trajectory of the evolving legal landscape, thereby safeguarding and acknowledging the reproductive autonomy of transgender individuals. By explicitly recognising and protecting their reproductive rights within the framework of the MTP Act and MTP Rules, this proposed amendment reflects a commitment to inclusivity and the principle of equal rights for all. It signifies a pivotal step towards dismantling barriers that may disproportionately affect transgender individuals, affirming their right to make informed choices about their reproductive health. This proactive legal stance not only promotes societal equality but also underscores the government’s commitment to upholding the fundamental rights of every citizen, regardless of gender identity.

Kosovo declares independence from Serbia

On February 17, 2008 the Assembly of Kosovo declared independence from Serbia. While Serbia denounced the declaration as illegal, the international community has remained divided on this issue. Several nations including the United States, United Kingdom, France, Taiwan, and Turkey have recognized Kosovar independence, but others such as Russia maintain that the declaration violates international law. The majority of countries and international organizations, including the United Nations, have yet to take a position on the legality of Kosovar independence. The Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo went into effect on June 15, 2008. Read the Kosovo Declaration of Independence and a timeline of the Kosovar independence movement.

Supreme Court ruled on equal Congressional districts

On February 17, 1964, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Wesberry v. Sanders that congressional districts within each state had to be roughly equal in population. Learn more about Congressional redistricting from the Center for Voting and Democracy.

The official blog of the UCL Student Pro Bono Committee

Access to Justice and Pro Bono Blog

Human Rights as a Western Construct: India as an Example

By Ila Tyagi 

LLM student, Ila Tyagi, argues against ‘universal human rights’ as they are typically understood, drawing from cultural relativist arguments and using India as an example.

In many developing countries, human rights are often considered to be western concepts imposed on them by foreign governments and treaties. The problem lies in the narrow and egocentric definition of human rights [1] . There are many arguments against the universality of human rights. This essay aims to explain some of the arguments against human rights and presents a solution to universalise human rights.

There is also an argument claiming human rights are a barrier to rapid economic development. According to a study compiled by researchers at the Centre for Children’s Movement for Civic Awareness in India, most Indian youths demonstrated “authoritarian leanings” and were skeptical about the advantages of democracy [14] . This is largely because some Indian youth believe that relinquishing human rights is a small sacrifice for bigger results like economic development [15] . These authoritarian inclinations can also be attributed to rampant corruption [16] in the government organisations and indecisive coalition governments. Furthermore, the Indian politicians often engage in divisive politics based on caste and religion in order to amass votes from the minorities and people from their communities. This practice has led to people voting their caste rather than casting their vote.  The youth perceive the presence of too many regional and communal interests in the parliament as a hindrance to the achievement of a supreme national goal i.e. economic development. Many Indians believe that a benign dictator or a strong central government is the only means of achieving India’s ambitions. This desire for a stronger central government is what fuelled the rise of Bhartiya Janta Party and Prime Minister Narendra Modi to power. It is common amongst Indians to compare India’s achievements with those of China in the fields of infrastructure building, economic growth and even Olympic medals (of which China has plenty and India just a handful).

In order to illustrate my point, let us compare the development of an infrastructure project in a democratic developing country like India and a developing country based on authoritarian capitalism. In the authoritarian country, building an airport would probably take a few months because the government would not be hassled by issues of compensation, eviction and protestors. However, in a democracy like India where there is freedom of association, free press and the freedom to protest; the government would have to seek people’s permission in order to evict them. Many people would refuse to evict their houses and rightfully so if adequate compensation is not paid to them. Various interest groups would protest for the rights of the vulnerable people who are affected by the project. The free media would highlight the negative environmental impacts of building an airport. Some interests groups may even commence public interest litigation against the government and the corporate entities involved in the project. Thus, it might take years to complete the project. This would mean the democratic country might develop at the slow pace of an elephant as opposed to the swiftness of the authoritarian dragon.

In addition, the governments of many developing countries argue that the right to development is more important than the right to political liberties [17] . Some countries with higher crime rates might argue that the need for right to security justifies the harsh enforcement measures used to protect this right [18] . Many countries justify the use of torture techniques used in prison interviews as necessary to solve the case [19] . The fact that most developing countries do not have well guarded prisons is also used to support using harsh interrogation methods and prison sentences [20] . Under the human rights laws, the developing countries are required to incorporate major institutional and behavioral changes while the western countries can maintain their status quo. The developing countries are now facing challenges that the West had encountered in a distant past [21] when its own human rights credentials were stained by practices like slavery, racial segregation and anti-Semitism [22] .

In conclusion, a distinction must be drawn between the universality of human rights and the uniformity of human rights [23] .  In order to promote a universal approach to human rights the West needs to recognise the failures of current human rights system in promoting human rights in the developing world and rectify its policy accordingly [24] . Perhaps a policy of opting in and opting out of certain provisions may serve the interests of those societies that do not agree with all the provisions in various human rights declarations [25] . However, coercive practices like female circumcision and subjugation of women in various cultures should be condemned because no rights exist when one is coerced to adopt certain cultural beliefs or practices [26] . The new model for development should be inclusive and not alienate vulnerable groups of people. We should strive to assert human rights in accordance with each country’s histories and traditions rather than as a rigid foreign concept [27] . The one-size fits all approach should be abandoned in favour of a flexible approach to suit the needs of our diverse world.

[1] Stephen Kinzer, ‘End Human Rights Imperialism Now’ The Guardian (London 31 December 2010) < https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/dec/31/human-rights-imperialism-james-hoge >accessed 26 February 2017

[2] Eric Posner, ‘The Case Against Human Rights’ The Guardian (London 4 December 2014) < https://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/dec/04/-sp-case-against-human-rights > accessed 26 February 2017

[4] Shashi Tharoor, ‘ Are Human Rights Universal? World Policy Journal 2000 vol 26 < http://www.worldpolicy.org/tharoor.html > accessed 25 February 2017

[7] Clancy Wright, ‘ Western Human Rights in Diverse World: Cultural Imperialism or Relativism?’ (E-International Relations Student, 25 April 2014) < http://www.e-ir.info/2014/04/25/western-human-rights-in-a-diverse-world-cultural-suppression-or-relativism/ > accessed 25 February 2017

[8] Shashi Tharoor, ‘ Are Human Rights Universal? World Policy Journal 2000 vol 26 < http://www.worldpolicy.org/tharoor.html > accessed 25 February 2017

[9] Clancy Wright, ‘ Western Human Rights in Diverse World: Cultural Imperialism or Relativism?’ (E-International Relations Student, 25 April 2014) < http://www.e-ir.info/2014/04/25/western-human-rights-in-a-diverse-world-cultural-suppression-or-relativism/ > accessed 25 February 2017

[10] Shashi Tharoor, ‘ Are Human Rights Universal? World Policy Journal 2000 vol 26 < http://www.worldpolicy.org/tharoor.html > accessed 25 February 2017

[11] Eric Posner, ‘The Case Against Human Rights’ The Guardian (London 4 December 2014) < https://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/dec/04/-sp-case-against-human-rights > accessed 26 February 2017

[12] Shashi Tharoor, ‘ Are Human Rights Universal? World Policy Journal 2000 vol 26 < http://www.worldpolicy.org/tharoor.html > accessed 25 February 2017

[13] Eric Posner, ‘The Case Against Human Rights’ The Guardian (London 4 December 2014) < https://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/dec/04/-sp-case-against-human-rights > accessed 26 February 2017

[14] Kanishk Tharoor, ‘Why Many Indians and Americans have Authoritarian Leanings?’ Hindustan Times (New Delhi 30 December 2016)< http://www.hindustantimes.com/columns/why-many-young-indians-and-americans-have-authoritarian-leanings/story-zSizwsoDPJKvOm5vSKmnUJ.html > accessed on 26 February 2016

[15] Shashi Tharoor, ‘ Are Human Rights Universal? World Policy Journal 2000 vol 26 < http://www.worldpolicy.org/tharoor.html > accessed 25 February 2017

[16] Kanishk Tharoor, ‘Why Many Indians and Americans have Authoritarian Leanings?’ Hindustan Times (New Delhi 30 December 2016)< http://www.hindustantimes.com/columns/why-many-young-indians-and-americans-have-authoritarian-leanings/story-zSizwsoDPJKvOm5vSKmnUJ.html > accessed on 26 February 2016

[17] Eric Posner, ‘The Case Against Human Rights’ The Guardian (London 4 December 2014) < https://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/dec/04/-sp-case-against-human-rights > accessed 26 February 2017

[22] Shashi Tharoor, ‘Are Human Rights Universal? World Policy Journal 2000 vol 26 < http://www.worldpolicy.org/tharoor.html > accessed 25 February 2017

[24] Eric Posner, ‘The Case Against Human Rights’ The Guardian (London 4 December 2014) < https://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/dec/04/-sp-case-against-human-rights > accessed 26 February 2017

[25] Shashi Tharoor, ‘ Are Human Rights Universal? World Policy Journal 2000 vol 26 < http://www.worldpolicy.org/tharoor.html > accessed 25 February 2017

5 Comments Add yours

' src=

Howdy! I just woud like to give you a huge thumbs up foor your great info you’ve got here on this post. I’ll be coming back to your site for more soon. is there a special schedule for posting ?

' src=

Hello! Posts are made based on submissions to the Blog.

' src=

This is a very good post! Just keep updating much useful information so that reader like me would come back over and over again.

' src=

Human rights Orgaization in India- Nachroi Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible.

Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of treaties, customary international law, general principles and other sources of international law. International human rights law lays down obligations of Governments to act in certain ways or to refrain from certain acts, in order to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals or groups. https://nachrworldwide.in/HUMAN-RIGHTS#

' src=

I have read countless articles about this topic but this was the only one that explained it clearly and concisely with examples that made sense. Thank you!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

  • Copyright © 2018 UCL
  • Freedom of Information
  • Accessibility
  • Privacy and Cookies
  • Slavery statement
  • Reflect policy

Please check your email to activate your account.

« Go back Accept

Legal Bites

20 Landmark Cases on Human Rights

This article explains 20 landmark cases on human rights that happened in the history of india.

20 Landmark Cases on Human Rights

This article explains 20 Landmark Cases on Human Rights that happened in the history of India and also proved to be essential in adding core value to the concept of Human Rights. Human rights are actually basic rights and freedom that belong to every individual in the world from birth until death. Through various cases, it has been reflected that the life, liberty, privacy, and dignity of any individual must be given paramount significance.

The author admires the role of the judiciary in the protection as well as promotion of human rights. The apex court of our country has always utilized its power of interpretation with such perfection that definitely broadened the scope of rights and as such made it expedient for people to enjoy their human rights.

Human Rights: A brief introduction

The concept of human rights is a very basic concept that is known to all of us in some or the other way. Rights that all we humans possess are human rights and are subject to protection. Respecting human rights should be considered a responsibility towards each fellow human being. At the same time, we cannot overemphasize only the rights and ignore duties. The rights of the children imply corresponding duties of the parent; the rights of women imply corresponding duties of the men towards women folk; we should perceive them.

If everybody does his duty the question of rights will not arise at all. The education on human rights should be undertaken in this manner that instead of worrying about the rights, one must be careful of the duties that one is performing.

All humanity is one undivided and indivisible family, and each one of us is responsible for the misdeeds of all the others. I cannot detach myself from the wickedest soul. – Mahatma Gandhi

1. Ramlila Maidan Incident v. Union of India and Ors. [1]

This case dates back to 2011 wherein there was an organization named Bharat Swabhiman Trust that tried to organize a yoga training camp that was supposed to include around five thousand people in Delhi's Ramlila Maidan . However, the situation did not seem to be simple. Because of an anti-government agitation on the issue of corruption and black money , instead of five thousand people, nearly fifty thousand people gathered on the grounds and the police had to implement Section 144 of the CrPC prohibiting the crowd from further creating any ruckus.

After Section 144 got implemented, it didn't take much time for the police to move inside the Ramlila ground at midnight while everyone was asleep and started lathi-charge and forced the citizens to empty the ground. This led to further agitation among citizens as they started throwing bricks and further, the police retreated with tear gases.

The court held that there is a difference between restriction of a right and prohibition of a right where the prohibition of the right standard can only be applied to such cases where no lesser alternative would be adequate.

Court also said that Section 144 intended to serve the public purpose and this section could only be invoked when the authorities are satisfied that there is an immediate need for prevention of danger and damage to human life, and safety and there is a prima-facie disturbance. The court also heavily criticized the police for its act of entering the grounds at midnight and said that reasonable notice must be provided to the public before imposing such an order to allow the public to leave the concerned site.

Through this case, a very important right of right to privacy of the sleeping person from inclusion was protected and the code observed that privacy also prevails while a person is sleeping.

2. M.C Mehta v. Union Of India [2]

In 1985, there was a leakage of Oleum gas from one of the units of Shriram Foods and Fertilizers Industries in Delhi, belonging to Delhi Cloth Mill Ltd. In this leakage, hundreds of lives were taken. In this case, the issues were basically related to whether such hazardous industries should be allowed to be operated in such areas and if they are allowed, whether any regulating mechanism should be evolved.

However, if explored from the Human Rights angle , the court held that in Oleum Gas Leak Case , a Constitution Bench discussed this question at length and held thus:

"We are of the view that an enterprise which is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous industry which poses a potential threat to the health and safety of the persons working in the factory and residing in the surrounding areas owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community to ensure that no harm results to anyone on account of hazardous or inherently dangerous nature of the activity which it has undertaken".

3. Lalita Kumari v. Government Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. [3]

In this case, a minor girl was kidnapped and when the father of the girl approached the police station the police refused to register the FIR. The father then moved to the Supreme Court over the failure of the police to register the FIR and simultaneously it was registered on the order of the court. The petition filed by the father was that the court must direct the police to apprehend the suspects and recover the girl.

In this case, which was related to the duty of the police to mandatorily register an FIR for the commission of a cognizable offence when came to the final judgment, the court said that the registration of FIR is mandatory under section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code , and if the offence is cognizable no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such situation as the scope of preliminary inquiry is not to cross-check the veracity of the information received but only to make sure whether the information reveals any cognizable offence.

Also, an important stance taken by the Court was that while ensuring the rights of the accused and the complainant, any inquiry which is done firsthand must be time-bound and should be completed within 7 days.

4. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, 1985 [4]

This case dated back to the year 1981, wherein, in the state of Maharashtra it was decided by the municipal corporation that the pavement dwellers and those residing in slums must be evicted. Simultaneously, the then Chief Minister of Maharashtra made an announcement over the same, and not much later a writ petition in the High Court of Bombay for an order of injunction was filed. The issues involved in this case were related to the scope of the right to life under Article 21 of the constitution and the question was whether pavement dwellers are responses under the Indian Penal Code.

The exact words of the court were:

"No individual can trade the freedoms that are conferred on him by the Constitution. A concession made by him in a proceeding, whether by an error of law or otherwise, that he does not possess or assert a particular fundamental right, cannot create an estoppel against him in this proceeding or in any other subsequent procedure. Such a concession, if implemented, would run counter to the purpose of the Constitution."

The court said that the Right to Life which is protected under Article 21 is very far-reaching and it cannot be stated that life can be removed only in accordance with the procedure established by law; the right to livelihood is a very important aspect of the right to life as no one can live without means of subsistence at any given time.

5. Vishaka v. State Of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011 [5]

This was indeed a landmark case in the history of Human Rights when it comes to the working condition for women. In this case, the Supreme Court witnessed a PIL against the state of Rajasthan and the Union of India filed by Vishaka and a few other women. In this case, a social worker named Bhanwri Devi was brutally gang-raped while she was doing a noble cause of barring child marriage. However, due to insufficient evidence, the case was dismissed.

This case spread like fire among all the women workers and sexual harassment in the workplace which is violative of Fundamental Rights under Articles 14, 15, and 21 was questioned.

The court held that clearly there has been a violation of Articles 14, 15, and 19 (1) of the constitution and also violations of all the international conventions that India was a part of. Through this case, Vishaka guidelines were issued and the judgment also provided some basic definitions like that of 'sexual harassment at the workplace along with that, guidelines for protection were provided as well. ( Read More about Vishaka v. State Of Rajasthan Here )

6. Shreya Singhal v. Union Of India [6]

In this case, two women posted some objectionable comments on Facebook regarding the 'bandh' (shutdown) announced in the city of Mumbai after the death of a political leader. They were arrested under section 66A of the Information Technology Act . However, they were released later on. This incident gained a lot of media attention and the issue concerned was whether it infringes the fundamental right to free speech and expression.

The petitioner argued that this section is unconstitutional as it encourages annoyance, danger, obstruction, and ill-will; and further, they said that this law has a 'chilling effect on the right to freedom of speech and expression. The court held that Section 66A is violative of the Fundamental Rights under Article 19(1)A of the constitution and therefore section 66A of the IT Act must be declared void. The court declined to address the petitioner's challenge of procedural unreasonableness as the law was already declared unconstitutional in the previous proceedings.

7. National Legal Service Authority (NALSA) v. Union Of India [7]

This was a very special case and probably the most important one in the history of Human Rights in India. Transgender, who also form a part of the population were not legally recognized as persons before this judgment. They faced inequalities in various walks of life and their human rights were often violated. This case was filed by the National Legal Service Authority of India with the view that transgender must be legally recognized as persons who do not fall in the category of either male or female but in a different category as the third gender.

In this case, along with recognizing a transgender as the third gender, there was a long and complex discussion over gender identity. The court recognized transgender as any other person have Fundamental Rights under both Constitution of India and International Laws . It was decided that transgender persons have all the rights including the right provided under Articles 14, 15, 16, 19(1) A and 21 of the constitution .

The apex court also referred to International Human Rights Treaties and the Yogyakarta Principles to recognize the Human Rights of transgender people. Along with recognition of their rights, it was ordered that they must be treated as minorities and for them, there must be reservations in jobs, education, and other sectors as and when the need arises.

8. Mohammed Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum [8]

In this case, the petitioner Shah Bano Begum was thrown out of the matrimonial home by her husband uttering ' talaq ' three times. Her husband abandoned her from the maintenance of Rs. 200 which he was supposed to give. After pronouncing triple talaq, he hid under the veil, that he is not supposed to give any maintenance. The Local Court however directed Muhammad Ahmad to furnish Rupees 25 per month as maintenance to Shah Bano.

The petitioner further took this case to the Supreme Court wherein, the judgment as pronounced by CJ Chandrachud was that section 125 (3) of the CrPC. solicited Muslims without any sort of discrimination. Supreme Court held that it is the responsibility of the husband towards the divorced wife to maintain her. In short, the Supreme Court specifically put pressure on the statement that triple talaq cannot take away the maintenance right of a divorced Muslim woman who is unable to maintain herself or her children.

This case particularly focused on the Human rights of a woman irrespective of her religion . This case proved to be a landmark judgment as based on it, many cases with similar issues were resolved. (Read More about this case Here)

9. Harvinder Kaur v. Harmandir Singh Chaudhary [9]

In this case, the petitioner was married to Harmandir Singh and both of them were employed. From the wedlock, they had a child and subsequently, the petitioner moved out with the child and the husband filed a case under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act after which the petitioner filed this present case in the Delhi High Court challenging the constitutional validity of section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

The issue was whether Section 9 was constitutionally valid and whether or not the degree for restitution was against the right to life, equality, and privacy . The High Court while deciding the matter found that the trouble from the wife was intentional and without a reasonable cause and hence, the Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal. The court rejected the plaint that personal law was discriminatory towards gender inequality in India. It also said that the introduction of constitutional law into the home (pointing towards the personal laws) was most inappropriate in India.

10. Kesavanand Bharati v. State of Kerala [10]

This very famous case of 1973 was decided by the largest bench in the history of India which was 13 judges bench . The petitioner was the founder of 'Edneer Mutt' situated in Kerala and he challenged the Kerala government's attempt to impose restrictions on the management of its property.

Through this case, India was gifted with the Doctrine of Basic Structure . The court held that the doctrine of basic structure cannot be violated and accordingly the court outlined that the power to amend the basic structure is very very limited. It is to be noted that this case overruled the Golaknath case and the court specifically said that only because the Parliament has the power under Article 368 of the constitution , it cannot rewrite the whole constitution taking into view its power. (Read More about this case Here)

11. Habeas Corpus Case – ADM Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla [11]

This case came into existence at the time of emergency when Smt. Indira Gandhi's election to Lok Sabha was challenged before the Allahabad High Court and agitated from the same she declared an emergency on 26th November 1975 under which a lot of people including renowned politicians like Jai Prakash Narayan and Atal Bihari Vajpayee were arrested under (Maintenance of Internal Security) MISA Act . A lot of petitions throughout the country started rushing into the courts and petitioners started getting judgments in their favour as well.

The government became concerned with the High Court's order and therefore approached the Supreme Court in the case of ADM Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla. This case was a black spot in the Indian historical judgment led by five judges bench.

Justice H.R. Khanna gave a biased judgment which was heavily criticized. The constitutional validity of Section 16A (9) of the MISA Act was also upheld . Even Justice Bhagwati expressed his regret for siding with the majority by saying that he was wrong not to uphold the cause of individual liberty. But as soon as the emergency ended the Supreme Court changed its decision by giving Article 21 a permanent status and linking it with Articles 14 and 19 . (Read More about this case Here)

12. Joseph Shine v. Union of India [12]

In this case, the petitioner Joseph Shine filed a PIL under section 32 of the Constitution challenging the constitutionality of the offence of Adultery mentioned in section 497 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 198 (2) of Cr.P.C.

In this case, the Supreme Court said that the husband is not a master of the wife and therefore adultery cannot be treated as a crime however it still is a reasonable ground for divorce and it will be considered criminal if it leads to abetment of suicide. Other than that, adultery is not a criminal act as it violates the dignity of a woman infringing Article 21 of the Constitution and ultimately the Human Rights. In July 2018, the Supreme Court struck down section 497 of the Indian Penal Code considering it violative of Articles 14 15, and 21 of the constitution .

13. Indian Young Lawyers Association and Ors. v. The State of Kerala and Ors. [13]

This case infamous as the Sabrimala case was an important judgment both in terms of human rights as well as busting the religion-related myths. The Sabrina temple located inside the Periyar Tiger Reserve in Kerala restricted the entry of women between the age of 10 and 50 which is the menstruating age of women , from entering into the temple.

The Supreme Court received restrictions over the matter through Article 32 of the constitution of India and after a long led trial, it decided that the step of devotion to divinity is not subjected to the rigidity and orthodoxy of gender which as a result affects the dignity of women and degrades their status. The Supreme Court allowed the entry of women into the Sabarimala temple and upholding the principles of human rights , stated that devotion cannot be subjected to gender discrimination .

14. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union Of India [14]

In this case, the Supreme Court took Article 14 as the base of the judgment. The court said that criminalizing the consensual sex between two individuals only because they are homosexual is against the order of nature and is not a proper intelligible differential and has no rational nexus.

The Supreme Court also added that sex includes both biological sex plus sexual orientation which was earlier observed in the Naz Foundation case and said that it is the proper approach to steer this case as well.

Justice D.Y. Chandrachud said,

human sexuality cannot be narrowly defined and Article 19 gives the freedom of expression and includes expressing one on identity without any fear. Taking Article 21 into consideration the court said that the right to life and liberty includes privacy, dignity and autonomy for each individual. Section 377 cannot be put as a restriction before the individual to enjoy all the above-mentioned rights.

15. K. Basu, A.K Johri v. State of West Bengal [15]

This case is infamous as D.K. Basu case is one of the landmark cases that prima facie deals with custodial deaths but relates to human rights in terms of the arrest of a person . D.K. Basu was the executive chairman of the Legal Aid Service of West Bengal. He wrote a letter to the Supreme Court of India mentioning an incident of death in police custody and lockups. He requested the letter to be treated as a writ petition under Public Interest Litigation .

Upon the same being accepted, Mr. A.K. Johri wrote another letter to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court mentioning a man named Mahesh Bihari who died in police custody.

This Supreme Court held that prisoners should never be deprived of their fundamental rights guaranteed to every person under Article 21 and only reasonable restrictions could be imposed upon such rights without infringing them together. In the same case, the Supreme Court gave around 11 guidelines notwithstanding the constitutional provisions which were to be followed while making arrest and detainment upon failure of which department inquiry will be set up and also contempt of court proceedings in High Court will be taken up.

Human rights also extend to prisoners and detain is was the important principle that was revised in this case.

16. Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Ors. v. State of Punjab [16]

In this case between Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and the State of Punjab, the Supreme Court of India held that the courts' discretion to provide anticipatory bail cannot be nearly restricted because the punishment for a specific crime is death or imprisonment. Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia was the Minister of Irrigation and Power in the state of Punjab under the Congress government. He, along with a few other persons was facing serious allegations of corruption.

The minister along with others applied for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also prayed from the High Court to direct the appellants to get bail in the due course of arrest on the basis of the above-pressed charges. It didn't take much longer for the High Court to dismiss the application but on special leave to appeal the application was allowed by the Supreme Court .

Now, the question arises of how is it related to human rights . It indeed is because by restricting a person who is doubted to do some wrong we protect the innocent and on the other hand, sometimes the innocent are unnecessarily harassed for malafide purposes. In both circumstances, it becomes the moral duty of the courts to think from the perspective of Human Rights to arrive at a better conclusion.

17. Ritesh Sinha v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. [17]

This case was a landmark case in Human Rights relating to the power of a magistrate to order an accused to give their voice samples to the police for comparison. In this case, during the investigation, the police wanted to collect the voice example of an accused to compare it with the recorded conversation which was evidence. However, the accused refrained from doing so and mentioned that there was no specific provision in the CrPC for the same, and neither did the magistrate possess any power to give such a direction to gather a voice sample.

Now the question arose whether Article 20 (3) of the Indian Constitution extends to protect such accused from being forced to give their voice sample during the interrogation .

The court said that in collecting such samples there are no specific provisions mentioned in the CrPC. however, there are provisions relating to the collection of DNA samples, handwriting samples, blood samples, etc, so taking voice samples would not be unfair, and coming on the privacy terms compelling a person to give a voice specimen does not become violative of their fundamental right to privacy ; and to give an example, the court stated the famous case of K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India .

18. PUCL v. Union Of India [18]

What will you do if you get to know that your phone is being tapped? This indeed was a very interesting case relating to the burning topic of tapping of phone calls. The petitioner who was from a civil rights organization filed a PIL in the Supreme Court in which the authenticity of Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 was challenged.

According to the section, the government is authorized to intercept the phone for any specified reason. In the petition, it was mentioned that the power of interception was undefined and very arbitrary. The Supreme Court observed that section 5(2) did not mention any specific procedure according to which the interception should be exercised and yes it was arbitrary and not reasonable and fair. So, without declaring the section unconstitutional, the court set up procedural safeguards instead for those authorized for tapping phones.

19. State of Haryana and Ors. v. CH. Bhajanlal and Ors. [19]

In this case, the petitioner was a former Chief Minister of the state of Haryana and was accused by his political rival of gathering wealth that exceeded his income. Subsequently, an FIR was registered under the Indian Penal Code and Prevention of Corruption Act and the petitioner sought to quash the FIR. However, the High Court after discussing the allegations held, that allegations against the petitioner don't constitute and therefore there was no bias for the police to have registered FIR, and subsequently it was further challenged by the state before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court held that the High Court has the power to quash the FIR to protect an accused from malicious prosecution when a proceeding is instituted with the wrong intention of simply harassing a person the court can step in to cause the entire proceeding to meet the ends of justice. In this case, the Supreme Court issued seven guidelines to be followed by the court in the exercise of its inherent powers rested by section 482 of the CrPC .

20. Sarla Mudgal v. Union Of India [20]

In this case, there were various petitioners including Meena Mathur, Sunita Narula, alias Fatima, Geeta Rani, and Sushmita Ghosh. The issues that were raised in this case were whether a Hindu husband married under Hindu law by embracing Islam can solemnize the second marriage and whether such a marriage without dissolving the first marriage under the law would be a valid marriage also the question was whether the apostate husband would be guilty of the offence under section 494 of the IPC .

The court considered the practice of converting to another religion for the purpose of second marriage without dissolving the first marriage as invalid because it was against the principle of justice equity and good conscience. The court also stated that mere conversion from one religion to another does not dissolve the first marriage of a person and the only way to dissolve a marriage is by divorce obtained by the competent court.

There is a very famous shloka in the Hindu mythology that goes:

Sarve Bhavantu Sukhina, sarve santu niramayah Sarve bhadrani pasyantu, ma kaschiddhu khabhagabhaveta

It means that may all sentient beings be at peace, may no one suffer from illness, May all see what is auspicious, may no one suffer. May we get peace, peace, and peace.

Although law has no religion except meeting the ends of justice, we can relate that Human Rights are based on the principle of well being of all, whether by granting justice to one or by reasonably restricting another. And as Mother Teresa said

" Human Rights are not a privilege conferred by government. They are every human being's entitlement by virtue of his humanity."

References:

[1] Writ Petition (CRL.) No. 122 of 2011

[2] M. C. Mehta v. Union Of India 1987 AIR 1086, 1987 SCR (1) 819

[3] Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 68 OF 2008

[4] Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, 1986 AIR 180, 1985 SCR Supl. (2) 51

[5] Vishaka v. State Of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011

[6] Writ Petition(Criminal) No.167 OF 2012

[7] Writ Petition (Civil) N0. 400 OF 2012

[8] 1985 AIR 945, 1985 SCR (3) 844

[9] AIR 1984 Delhi 66, ILR 1984 Delhi 546, 1984 RLR 187

[10] Writ Petition (Civil) 135 of 1970

[11] 1976 AIR 1207, 1976 SCR 172

[12] Writ Petition (Criminal) N0. 194 OF 2017

[13] 2018 SCC OnLine Ker 5802

[14] Writ Petition (Criminal) N0. 76 OF 2016

[15] Writ Petition ( CRL.) NO. 592 OF 1987

[16] 1980 AIR 1632

[17] Criminal Appeal N0. 2003 OF 2012

[18] AIR 1997 SC 568, JT 1997 (1) SC 288, 1996 (9) SCALE 318, (1997) 1 SCC 301, 1996 Supp 10 SCR 321, 1997 (1) UJ 187 SC

[19] 1992 AIR 604, 1990 SCR Supl. (3) 259

[20] 995 AIR 1531, 1995 SCC (3) 635

  • Law Library: Notes and Study Material for LLB, LLM, Judiciary, and Entrance Exams
  • Legal Bites Academy – Ultimate Test Prep Destination

Aayushi Tiwari

Aayushi Tiwari

A Law Student and a lifetime humanitarian from the historically rich state, Bihar. Avid reader, writes to bring a difference and a public speaker to enlighten others.

Related News

human rights case studies in india

  • Today’s Paper
  • Mumbai News
  • Chandigarh News
  • Bangalore News
  • Lucknow News
  • Ahmedabad News
  • Chennai News

India has many human rights issues, several instances of violence against journalists critical of govt: US report

The US report mentioned restrictions on freedom of expression and the press, including violence, threats of violence, or unjustified arrests or prosecutions against journalists, use of criminal libel laws to prosecute social media speech, censorship, and site blocking.

human rights case studies in india

India has several significant human rights issues, including unlawful and arbitrary killings, restrictions on freedom of expression and the press, corruption and tolerance of violations of religious freedom, a US report said on Tuesday.

In its ‘2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices’ to the US Congress, the Department of State noted the improvement in the human rights situation in Jammu and Kashmir.

human rights case studies in india

“The government continued taking steps to restore normalcy in Jammu and Kashmir by gradually lifting some security and communications restrictions,” said the State Department in its India section of the report. The government released most political activists from detention, it added.

In January, the government partially restored internet access; however, high-speed 4G mobile internet remained restricted in most parts of Jammu and Kashmir. The government began a process to redraw electoral constituencies but did not announce a timeline for local assembly elections. Local district development council elections took place in December in which a coalition of Kashmiri opposition parties won the majority of seats, the report said.

  • 68 murdered in Maliana, all accused acquitted 36 years later, residents ask: So who killed our families?
  • In appeal, Rahul says was mistreated, sentenced to attract disqualification
  • Kalakshetra suspends 4 teachers, appoints independent committee to probe sexual harassment allegations

Separatist insurgents and terrorists in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, the Northeast, and Maoist-affected areas committed serious abuses, including killings and torture of armed forces personnel, police, government officials, and civilians, and recruitment and use of child soldiers, it said.

Festive offer

The State Department in its report listed more than a dozen significant human rights issues for India. Prominent among them are unlawful and arbitrary killings, including extrajudicial killings perpetrated by police; torture and cases of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by some police and prison officials; arbitrary arrest and detention by government authorities; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; political and prisoners or detainees in certain states.

India in the past rejected similar reports.

“The government generally respected this right, although there were several instances in which the government or actors considered close to the government allegedly pressured or harassed media outlets critical of the government, including through online trolling.

“There were also reports of extremists perpetrating acts of killing, violence, and intimidation against journalists critical of the government,” the State Department said.

“In certain cases local authorities arrested or filed cases against individuals under laws against hate speech for expressions of political views. The harassment and detainment of journalists critical of the government in their reporting or social media messaging continued,” the report said.

The report also mentioned the conviction of lawyer Prashant Bhushan for criminal contempt of court for two tweets that criticised the chief justice and the role played by the Supreme Court in the past six years, and a complaint filed against news website ‘The Wire’ editor Siddharth Varadarajan for his tweet referencing a news report on Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath .

Among other human rights issues raised by the State Department are overly restrictive rules on nongovernmental organisations; restrictions on political participation; widespread corruption at all levels in the government and lack of investigation of and accountability for violence against women.

In its report, the State Department also talks about tolerance of violations of religious freedom; crimes involving violence and discrimination targeting members of minority groups including women based on religious affiliation or social status; and forced and compulsory child labour, as well as bonded labour.

India vs England Live Score: IND vs ENG 3rd Test Day 3 Live Cricket Score from Saurashtra Cricket Association Stadium, Rajkot

Indian team faces setback on Day 3 of India vs England 3rd Test as Ashwin withdraws due to family emergency. Ben Duckett's unbeaten 133 and Joe Root's support make England's batting a challenge. Ashwin's absence may continue for last 2 Tests after taking his 500th wicket. Mohammed Siraj also contributes by dismissing Ollie Pope.

  • Delhi News Live Updates: Temporary structure collapses at JLN stadium, 2 rescued so far 22 mins ago
  • India vs England Live Score, 3rd Test Day 3: Ben Stokes and Ben Foakes resume, ENG 290/5 in Rajkot 23 mins ago
  • Pakistan Election Result 2024 Live Updates: Imran Khan's PTI opts to sit for Opposition role in Parliament, plans nationwide protest against 'election rigging' 53 mins ago
  • Mumbai News Live Updates: Fire breaks out in Govandi, damages 15 commercial units 56 mins ago

Indianexpress

Best of Express

narendra modi

Buzzing Now

The video of the swan stuck in between metal bars has crossed 10 million views on X.

Feb 17: Latest News

  • 01 Table tennis: Win over Chinese stars proves India’s youngsters have no fear of any opponent and refuse to be intimidated
  • 02 ‘Not surprised but outraged’: Biden holds Putin responsible for Navalny’s death
  • 03 No time to waste, hit the streets against BJP: Abhishek Banerjee to TMC leaders
  • 04 Ravichandran Ashwin withdraws from IND vs ENG 3rd Test due to family emergency
  • 05 Imran Khan’s party calls outcome of Pakistan’s general elections as ‘biggest voter fraud’
  • Elections 2024
  • Political Pulse
  • Entertainment
  • Movie Review
  • Newsletters
  • Web Stories
  • Play Crossword
  • Express Shorts
  • Premium Stories
  • Health & Wellness
  • Take Our Reader Survey

News Nation Logo

Human Rights Day: Major cases of human rights violation in India

India has witnessed some major cases of human rights violation which led to a lot of bloodshed due to violent clashes between religious groups, ethnic clans and social groups..

Human Rights Day: Major cases of human rights violation in India (Representational Image)

Human rights have generally been chartered out for protection of human life and liberty, to preserve the dignity of people, promote brotherhood and maintain equality etc. Our very own Indian Constitution endorses the same rights for all citizens of the country.   Every citizen of India has been granted six fundamental rights to live his life with full dignity and earn respect in society irrespective of caste, creed, colour, religion or sex. The fundamental rights are namely - right to equality, right to freedom, right against exploitation, right to freedom of religion, cultural and educational rights, and finally, the right to constitutional remedies.   After 70 years of independence our motherland stands on the brink of being labelled a fully developed nation. We might have made giant leaps economically, rapid technological advancements but when it comes to our social progress we still are pretty backward as we haven’t reformed socially and the age old taboos do certainly haunt our progressive mind-set.

India has witnessed some major cases of human rights violation which led to a lot of bloodshed due to violent clashes between religious groups, ethnic clans and social groups. The United Nations adopted a charter of Human Rights for the respect of people and on  10th December   1948, the UN adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for the protection of Human Rights. India was a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but case of human rights violations are very much prevalent.

So let us recall some of the gruesome incidents of human rights violations in our country which left the country in a state of distress. MASS EXODUS OF KASHMIRI PUNDITS FROM VALLEY  Terrorism forced the Hindus, a large majority of whom were Kashmiri Pandits, to flee from their homes in the Kashmir valley in the early part  of 1990. According to Asia Watch, the militant organisations forced the Hindus residing in the Kashmir valley to flee and become refugees in Delhi-NCR and Jammu. Ethnic cleansing continued till a vast majority of the Kashmiri Pandits were evicted out of the valley after having suffered numerous acts of violence, including sexual assault on women, arson, mental torture and extortion of property. HINDU – SIKH RIOTS IN DELHI - 1984 In the early 1980s, Sikh separatists in Punjab demanding separate state ‘Khalistan’ committed serious human rights abuses, massacring civilians, attacking Hindu minorities, and carried out bomb attacks in crowded places. In June 1984, the government deployed security forces to flush out the militants who had occupied the holiest of Sikh shrines, the Golden Temple in Amritsar. The military campaign inflicted serious damage to the shrine and killed hundreds, including pilgrims, militants, and security personnel. On  October 31, 1984 , Indira Gandhi was murdered in an act of revenge by two of her Sikh bodyguards. Following the assassination, mobs, reportedly instigated by political leaders, went on a rampage against Sikhs in Delhi and other cities. Over three days, over 2500 Sikhs were killed, robbed of their belongings and and destroyed. Many women were raped in the national capital. Hundreds of Sikhs were massacred elsewhere in the country. The authorities quickly blamed every incident of mass communal violence on a spontaneous public reaction. DEATH OF ROHITH VEMULA, A Dalit Phd Student The age old clashes between the so called upper class and the underprivileged lot is not something new in India’s social set up. The suicide of Rohith Vemula, a Dalit PhD student at the Hyderabad Central University, was just one example of many such avoidable clashes which involved Dalit students.   The inhumane treatment handed out to members of the Dalit community finally reached the masses. In some of these cases, Dalits were being stripped and beaten by vigilante groups, some even being urinated upon.   CHILD LABOUR DEPRIVES MANY IGNITED MINDS OF A BRIGHT FUTURE Child labour is one of the biggest menaces which grips many bright children and spoils their promising futures. Children belonging to the poorer or economically weaker sections of the society often fall prey to child labour. For want of money, their parents force them to take on petty jobs at a very tender age and make huge compromise with their education. According to Human Rights Watch, two out of five children in India drop out of school before completing their eighth standard. Hence, a large number of children in our country are robbed of their fundamental right to free and compulsory education. Security forces carrying out operations against Maoist insurgents were accused of serious human rights violations like sexual harassment and killing of innocent tribal villagers. According to a report given by National Commission of Scheduled Tribe, security forces deployed in Odisha killed five tribal villagers including children and claimed that they were killed during anti-Maoist operations.

For all the Latest Campaign News , Human Rights Day News , Download News Nation Android and iOS Mobile Apps.

Related tags:.

game changer

  • Skip to main content

Site Search

Important Cases

: 1. Abuse of legal system in trafficking of girls; Commission calls for report from Delhi Police Commissioner The Commission has taken suo-motu cognizance of a complaint filed by the NGO, International Law Affiliates on the plight of poor girls in Nepal and India being trafficked and forced into prostitution in various red light areas. The complainant, while requesting the Commission to consider taking action, had forwarded a copy of his petition addressed to the Chief Justice of India dated 27 December 2004 as well as a news article captioned "The Girl Breakers of Delhi" published in a national daily on 19 December 2004. The news article is a gory narration of trafficking and exploitation of girls belonging to lower strata of the community. It makes a reference to the collusion between the pimps, brothel owners and police officials to force poor gullible girls into the prostitution racket. As an example the news article highlighted one of the modus operandi as :- "The farce follows set stages: a trumped-up case is registered against these minor girls falsely alleging that they were trying to solicit clients in a public place. The minor girls are then arrested and kept in lock-up while the police prepare a challan wherein the minor girls age is entered as 21. This entry is apparently sufficient to transform overnight the minor girl into an adult for all subsequent court proceedings. After this, these minor girls are produced before a magistrate and released on bail." The Commission observed that the contents of the article, if true, portray a dismal picture of exploitation and trafficking of girls by the abuse of legal system in connivance with the authorities who are supposed to provide protection against such exploitation. The article points towards an organized racket in trafficking of girls and raises a serious human rights issue, which needs to be addressed with all seriousness. It has directed that a copy of the petition along with a copy of the news article referred to above be forwarded to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi with a request to inquire into the matter and submit his report within four weeks. 2. Rape of a visually impaired girl at Nadia; Commission asks for comments from the West Bengal Government Taking suo-motu cognizance of a news item captioned "Disabled Girl raped at home" which appeared in a national daily dated 17 December 2004, the Commission has asked the Director General of Police, Kolkata, West Bengal to look into the allegation contained in the news story and submit his comments within two weeks. The newspaper had published a news story on 17 December 2004 wherein it was reported that a 19-year-old visually impaired girl had been allegedly raped at her home by two miscreants in Dhorandaha village, Karimpur, Nadia, West Bengal in the absence of her parents. The report further stated that both the miscreants allegedly have political clout and a reputation in the locality as musclemen. It also stated that the miscreants have threatened the victim not to report the incident to the police. The mother of the victim was initially scared to file a complaint but at the instance of village elders she lodged an FIR, it said. Earlier the duo had allegedly raped women but no complaint was lodged against them. 3. Commission asks comments from Karnataka Government on the death of a boy in Observation Home Taking suo-motu cognizance of a news item captioned "Observation Home under scanner/Boy found dead in Observation Home" which appeared in a national daily dated 14 December 2004, the Commission has asked the Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka, to look into the allegations contained in it and submit his comments within two weeks. The newspaper had reported that 14-year-old Santosh, an inmate of Observation Home, Madivala, Bangalore, Karnataka, was found hanging by a rope from the ceiling of the toilet on 13 December 2004. According to the report, the deceased was put in the Observation Home on charges of theft and committed suicide. It also stated that 35 boys lodged in the Observation Home were reportedly shocked and no longer wanted to stay in the premises. The report further disclosed that Ms. Brinda Adiga of Makkala Sahaya Vani, the children's help line charged the staff in the Observation Home as being not skilled enough to handle juveniles. No intimation about the death in the Observation Home has so far been received in the Commission from the authorities concerned. The Commission observed that if the contents of the report are true, the issue raised in it causes serious concern about the protection of human rights of juveniles lodged in the Observation Homes in Karnataka.

Menu

Subscribe Now! Get features like

human rights case studies in india

  • Latest News
  • Entertainment
  • Real Estate
  • India vs England Live Score
  • Web Stories
  • Mumbai News
  • Bengaluru News
  • Daily Digest

HT

Surrogacy in India: Navigating rights, inclusion, and child welfare

This article is authored by Ranjana Kumari, director, Centre for Social Research, New Delhi.

The recent Supreme Court (SC) ruling on an unmarried woman's plea for surrogacy has ignited a firestorm of debate, reigniting vital conversations about parenthood, reproductive rights, and the complexities of navigating societal norms within the legal framework. This decision, while shedding light on existing legislation, underscores the urgent need for a more inclusive and individual-centric approach to surrogacy in India.

Child birth(Photo by Mauricio Gutiérrez on Unsplash)

India's legal landscape has seen significant shifts with the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2020, aiming to curb exploitation and ensure child welfare. However, the Act's exclusion of unmarried individuals, same-sex couples, and foreigners has raised concerns about discriminatory practices and limited access to reproductive options.

The SC's denial highlights the challenges faced by individuals outside conventional family structures. While prioritising child welfare and marital sanctity holds merit, it necessitates a nuanced approach that considers individual circumstances and rights. Research from the National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4) reveals that approximately 20% of Indian households are headed by single parents, dispelling the myth of a monolithic family structure. Denying surrogacy access based solely on marital status overlooks these diverse realities, perpetuating stigma and discrimination.

The law must adapt to evolving societal norms, upholding principles of equality and individual autonomy. While the 2020 Act aims to safeguard vulnerable parties, it must ensure equitable access to surrogacy services irrespective of marital status, age, or sexual orientation. Aligning with international practices and acknowledging diverse family structures are crucial steps towards a more inclusive and compassionate framework.

Expanding the discourse, we must recognise the potential benefits of surrogacy for individuals and couples facing infertility, same-sex couples, and those choosing alternative family paths. Restricting access based on marital status or sexual orientation risks further marginalising these populations and denying them the right to experience parenthood.

However, the conversation doesn't end there. Ethical considerations extend beyond intended parents to encompass the rights and well-being of surrogate mothers and children born through these arrangements. Regulations must ensure the protection of all parties involved, upholding informed consent, fair compensation, and safeguarding the dignity and autonomy of surrogate mothers.

It's crucial to address the socio-economic factors influencing women's decisions to become surrogates. Many, particularly from marginalised communities, may choose surrogacy for financial support. Any framework must guarantee their rights and ensure they aren't exploited or coerced.

In light of these complexities, policymakers, legal experts, health care professionals, and civil society organisations must collaborate to develop comprehensive regulations that balance the needs of all stakeholders. Extensive consultations with surrogate mothers, intended parents, advocacy groups, and medical professionals are essential to ensure a fair, inclusive, and reflective framework.

Ultimately, the goal of surrogacy regulations should be to promote reproductive autonomy, protect the rights and well-being of all individuals involved, and ensure ethical and responsible practices. By fostering a supportive legal and social environment, India can empower individuals and couples to build families according to their wishes while upholding principles of justice, equality, and human rights.

To conclude, I would like to highlight the Recommendations from Centre for Social Research Studies on Surrogacy:

  • Include in-depth studies: Incorporate research exploring the experiences and perspectives of surrogate mothers, intended parents, and children born through surrogacy arrangements, particularly from diverse backgrounds.
  • Focus on socio-economic factors: Analyse the economic and social factors influencing women's decisions to become surrogates, including their vulnerabilities and motivations.
  • Evaluate international practices: Conduct comparative studies of international surrogacy regulations, examining their effectiveness in balancing the rights and interests of all involved parties.
  • Monitor implementation: Regularly assess the implementation of surrogacy regulations, identifying potential gaps and areas for improvement.
  • Promote public awareness: Raise awareness about surrogacy, addressing ethical considerations, legal frameworks, and the lived experiences of individuals involved.

By incorporating these recommendations emerging from two pioneering research conducted by Centre for Social Research in Surat, Anand and Jamnagar in Gujarat and Delhi and Mumbai , the major hubs of surrogacy (supported by the ministry of women and child development and the National Commission for Women) policymakers can develop a more informed and comprehensive approach to surrogacy regulation in India, ensuring a future that respects individual rights, protects vulnerable populations, and upholds the well-being of all stakeholders involved.

  • Supreme Court Ruling

Join Hindustan Times

Create free account and unlock exciting features like.

human rights case studies in india

  • Terms of use
  • Privacy policy
  • Weather Today
  • HT Newsletters
  • Subscription
  • Print Ad Rates
  • Code of Ethics

healthshots

  • India vs England
  • T20 World Cup 2024 Schedule
  • IPL 2024 Auctions
  • T20 World Cup 2024
  • ICC Rankings
  • Other Cities
  • Income Tax Calculator
  • Budget 2024
  • Petrol Prices
  • Diesel Prices
  • Silver Rate
  • Relationships
  • Art and Culture
  • Telugu Cinema
  • Tamil Cinema
  • Exam Results
  • Competitive Exams
  • Board Exams
  • BBA Colleges
  • Engineering Colleges
  • Medical Colleges
  • BCA Colleges
  • Medical Exams
  • Engineering Exams
  • Horoscope 2024
  • Festive Calendar 2024
  • Compatibility Calculator
  • The Economist Articles
  • Madhya Pradesh
  • Chhattisgarh
  • Explainer Video
  • On The Record
  • Vikram Chandra Daily Wrap
  • EPL 2023-24
  • ISL 2023-24
  • Asian Games 2023
  • Public Health
  • Economic Policy
  • International Affairs
  • Climate Change
  • Gender Equality
  • future tech
  • Daily Sudoku
  • Daily Crossword
  • Daily Word Jumble
  • HT Friday Finance
  • Explore Hindustan Times
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Subscription - Terms of Use

Login

IMAGES

  1. Human Rights in India: Historical, Social, and Political Perspectives

    human rights case studies in india

  2. Case Study: India

    human rights case studies in india

  3. Human Rights Violations: India and Global Scale- 2019

    human rights case studies in india

  4. Human Rights in Indian Constitution

    human rights case studies in india

  5. Human Rights Commission report reflects grim scenario in Madhya Pradesh

    human rights case studies in india

  6. HUL awarded by Ministry of Jal Shakti

    human rights case studies in india

VIDEO

  1. TERM 3: HUMAN RIGHTS, INCLUSIVITY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES || BUSINESS STUDIES GRADE 12

  2. Human Rights Violations in Pakistan.lnternational.Legal report

  3. HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION

  4. HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION #objectives#Indianconstitution ## humanrights##

  5. Meaning of Human Rights

  6. National Human Rights Commission

COMMENTS

  1. World Report 2021: India

    Jammu and Kashmir The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government increasingly harassed, arrested, and prosecuted rights defenders, activists, journalists, students, academics, and others...

  2. PDF INDIA 2020 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT

    Significant human rights issues included: unlawful and arbitrary killings, including extrajudicial killings perpetrated by police; torture and cases of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by some police and prison officials; arbitrary arrest and detention by government authorities; harsh and life- threatening prison conditions;...

  3. Human Rights Violations: A Case Study of Kashmir

    of Kashmir Lubna Mohiuddin Massive human rights Violations are taking place in the Indian- held Kashmir since January 1990 when the Indian government imposed president's rule and appointed Jagmohan as governor of Kashmir. The elected government of Farooq Abdullah resigned in protest against this decision of the Indian government.

  4. Major Human Rights violation cases, which drew the Commission's

    The Commission said that Right to Life is secured to citizens by Article 21 of the Constitution of India and if that right was endangered or taken away and the concerned authorities show an attitude of indifference or insensitivity to such incident, then the concerned authorities were prima facie guilty of omission in preventing the violation of...

  5. World Report 2023: India

    Impunity for Security Forces Allegations of torture and extrajudicial killings persisted, with the National Human Rights Commission registering 147 deaths in police custody, 1,882 deaths in...

  6. World Report 2022: India

    Impunity for Security Forces. Allegations of torture and extrajudicial killings persisted with the National Human Rights Commission registering 143 deaths in police custody and 104 alleged ...

  7. PDF Handbook of Landmark Judgments on Human Rights and Policing in India

    CHRI's seeks to promote adherence to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Commonwealth Harare Principles and other internationally recognised human rights instruments, as well as domestic instruments supporting human rights. International Advisory Commission:Alison Duxbury, Chairperson.

  8. PDF INDIA 2022 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT

    United States Department of State • Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor . INDIA 2022 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . India is a multiparty, federal, parliamentary democracy with a bicameral ... proceeding in the case was still underway at the end of December. On April 19, Vadivel Vignesh, a Dalit person, died in police ...

  9. Completed Projects

    Full Commission vide Case No. 4424/20/22/2022; Supreme Court Legal Services Committee (SCLSC) ... Corporate Duty to Respect Human Rights in India - An Empirical Study on the State of Human Rights Practices by Business firms in India ... Centre for Advanced Studies in Human Rights Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab : 2018 : Download ...

  10. US report lists 'significant human rights' abuses in India

    The annual U.S. report on human rights practices released on Monday listed "significant human rights issues" and abuses in India, including reported targeting of religious minorities, dissidents ...

  11. Minority Rights: A Case Study of India

    Minority Rights: A Case Study of India International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 12: 355-374, 2005. 355 © Koninklijke Brill NV. Printed in the Netherlands. Minority Rights: A Case Study of India MANOJ KUMAR SINHA* 1. Introduction The protection and promotion of human rights are important for the development

  12. Human rights in India

    v t e Human rights in India is an issue complicated by the country's large size and population as well as its diverse culture, despite its status as the world's largest sovereign, secular, socialist democratic republic. The Constitution of India provides for fundamental rights, which include freedom of religion.

  13. Indian state's polygamy ban divides some Muslim women

    Shayara Bano heaved a sigh of relief on Wednesday at the enactment of a law banning polygamy in her small Indian state, the culmination of a years-long effort including her own case before the ...

  14. A Case for Transgender Abortion Rights in India

    Health & Family Welfare Department, particularly the statement authored by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, has significantly brought abortion rights into the spotlight in India. The case specifically dealt with the abortion rights of 'unmarried' women under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003 (MTP Rules), and the Medical Termination ...

  15. Human rights concerns in India

    Claire Brader. For several years, concerns have been raised by international governments and human rights organisations about alleged human rights violations in India. Concerns include the protection of religious minorities in the country. India has disputed the allegations, reiterating its commitment to human rights.

  16. India: Laws Misused to Crack Down on Peaceful Dissent

    On February 2, 2024, India's national investigation agency, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), raided the home and offices of Harsh Mander, a prominent human rights activist, and filed a ...

  17. Human Rights Cases Statistics

    Human Rights Cases Statistics. Select Date. Download (430.37 KB) National Human Rights Commission.

  18. PDF Landmark Judgments of The Supreme Court of India

    The Supreme Court of India. • The Supreme Court of India is the highest Constitutional court of the Country which can be accessed directly by a citizen under Article. 32 of the Constitution for redress of fundamental rights. Commencing with eight judges, the sanctioned strength of the Court presently stands at 34.

  19. Human Rights as a Western Construct: India as an Example

    According to a study compiled by researchers at the Centre for Children's Movement for Civic Awareness in India, ... Eric Posner, 'The Case Against Human Rights' The Guardian (London 4 December 2014) < https: ... Human rights Orgaization in India- Nachroi Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality ...

  20. "No #MeToo for Women Like Us"

    The 56-page report, No #MeToo for Women Like Us': Poor Enforcement of India's Sexual Harassment Law," finds that while women in India are increasingly speaking out against sexual abuse at ...

  21. 20 Landmark Cases on Human Rights

    5. Vishaka v. State Of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011[5] This was indeed a landmark case in the history of Human Rights when it comes to the working condition for women. In this case, the Supreme Court witnessed a PIL against the state of Rajasthan and the Union of India filed by Vishaka and a few other women.

  22. Home

    Human Rights Defenders Cases Suo-Motu Cases Monthly Statistics What's New PHR Act, 1993 Guidelines Engagement of Consultant (Retired Inspector) on contract basis in th... Camp Sitting at Srinagar : Cause List (07.02.2024) (Posted on : 31-0... Camp Sitting at Srinagar : Cause List (08.02.2024) (Posted on : 31-0...

  23. India has many human rights issues, several instances of violence

    The State Department in its report listed more than a dozen significant human rights issues for India. Prominent among them are unlawful and arbitrary killings, including extrajudicial killings perpetrated by police; torture and cases of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by some police and prison officials; arbitrary arrest ...

  24. Out of Control: Mining, Regulatory Failure, and Human Rights in India

    Human Rights Watch interviews with mining industry officials, Panjim, September 2011; Letter from Anil Subramaniam, Under Secretary to the Government of India, to the Secretary of Goa's Mines ...

  25. Human Rights Day: Major cases of human rights violation in India

    The United Nations adopted a charter of Human Rights for the respect of people and on 10th December 1948, the UN adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for the protection of Human Rights. India was a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but case of human rights violations are very much prevalent.

  26. Important Cases

    1. Abuse of legal system in trafficking of girls; Commission calls for report from Delhi Police Commissioner The Commission has taken suo-motu cognizance of a complaint filed by the NGO, International Law Affiliates on the plight of poor girls in Nepal and India being trafficked and forced into prostitution in various red light areas.

  27. Surrogacy in India: Navigating rights, inclusion, and child welfare

    Evaluate international practices: Conduct comparative studies of international surrogacy regulations, examining their effectiveness in balancing the rights and interests of all involved parties.