Noel Naiju George, School of Law, Christ (Deemed to be University)
ABSTRACT
This paper examines the complex relationship between Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and the deeply embedded patriarchal norms that underlie it. Section 354 protects women from acts that violate their modesty, emphasizing their dignity and rights. However, a closer examination of its bare language reveals inherent patriarchal elements. Section 354’s patriarchal notions can be discerned through the emphasis on modesty, a concept historically rooted in women’s sexual purity and chastity, burdening them with conformity to specific behavioral standards. While well-intended, the law’s protective approach unconsciously reinforces traditional gender roles by portraying women as inherently vulnerable and reliant on male protection. Furthermore, patriarchal norms have influenced judicial interpretations of Section 354. Different judicial opinions reveal a variety of perspectives, ranging from emphasizing a woman’s immediate reaction to viewing modesty as an inherent characteristic, all of which reflect varying degrees of patriarchal influence. The paper also discusses the difficulties presented by the "reasonable man" test, which is frequently used in Section 354 cases and may fail to take into account women’s unique vulnerabilities and experiences, potentially leading to victim-blaming. To address these concerns, a more gender-inclusive approach that takes into account women’s perspectives and agency is required.
Comments