Gender Sensitization of Police and Judiciary: Evaluating Institutional Responsiveness Towards Female Victims in India

Abstract

This study explores the evolving relationship between judicial attitudes, evidentiary standards, and gender stereotypes within India's legal system, particularly concerning cases involving women survivors of violence. Grounded in India's Constitution, which ensures gender equality under Articles 14, 15, and 21, the study examines how legal provisions have been interpreted and applied over time, moving from a strict, male-dominated approach to one increasingly focused on gender-sensitive justice. The analysis traces pivotal moments, such as the Mathura incident and the Delhi gang rape case, that catalysed legal reforms and judicial shifts toward more equitable treatment of women. Despite strong legal frameworks, institutional biases and outdated attitudes still persist, influencing verdicts and outcomes in gender-related crimes. The study highlights how courts have gradually moved away from doubting survivor testimonies and began giving greater weight to individual narratives, even when unsupported by corroborative evidence. Landmark rulings like Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan and Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh exemplify a growing commitment to upholding women's dignity and ensuring justice, even in the absence of specific laws. However, the persistence of gender stereotypes and unequal application of justice underscores the challenge: progress is not solely about new laws but changing entrenched beliefs within judicial and law enforcement practices. The research calls for deeper gender sensitization and a sustained focus on both legal evolution and the attitudes of those who implement justice.