Unfinished Business of Gender Justice in India, From Bhanwari Devi to the Post Nirbhaya Era

Unfinished Business of Gender Justice in India, From Bhanwari Devi to the Post Nirbhaya Era

Introduction

The trajectory of gender justice in India is marked by both progress and persistent gaps. From the assault on Bhanwari Devi in 1992 to the 2012 Delhi gang rape, landmark cases have not only exposed systemic failures but have also forced the legal system to respond with new frameworks. Yet, despite new laws and judicial directives, the lived reality for women remains fraught with insecurity, societal prejudice, and institutional indifference.

The story of Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan (1997) is not just about one woman’s ordeal — it is a chronicle of grassroots activism transforming into judicial reform, and judicial reform into legislative change. But, as the title of the editorial in your source highlights, much of the “unfinished business” still remains, with India grappling with the gap between law and its enforcement.

The Bhanwari Devi Case: Catalyst for a National Conversation

In 1992, Bhanwari Devi, a grassroots worker with the Women Development Programme in Rajasthan, tried to prevent the child marriage of a one-year-old girl in her village. Her intervention was not welcomed by the entrenched patriarchal and caste-based power structures. In retaliation, she was gang-raped by five Gujjar landlords.

What followed was a chilling display of apathy:

• The police refused to file a First Information Report (FIR).

• Her medical report was incomplete.

• The accused were acquitted by the court, which relied heavily on her husband’s testimony and asserted that upper-caste men would not rape a lower-caste woman.

This verdict was not just a personal injustice to Bhanwari Devi — it became a symbol of the systemic oppression faced by women, especially Dalit women, and the institutional barriers to justice.

The Social and Political Climate in the 1980s–1990s

The decades preceding this case were marked by:

• Dowry deaths and domestic violence incidents.

• A rise in women’s rights activism, with protests, marches, and picketing.

• The intersection of gender injustice with caste oppression, often leaving Dalit women doubly marginalised.

Bhanwari Devi’s assault occurred while she was on duty — a factor that made the State’s refusal to protect her even more glaring. The case mobilised women’s collectives and Dalit groups nationwide, creating unprecedented solidarity and advocacy for systemic reform.

The Birth of the Vishakha Guidelines

The outrage led to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by a coalition of women’s organisations under the banner Vishakha against the State of Rajasthan and the Union of India.

In 1997, the Supreme Court of India delivered a historic judgment:

• Recognised gender equality as integral to the right to life and dignity under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21.

• Declared sexual harassment at the workplace as a violation of fundamental rights, making it a constitutional issue.

• Issued the Vishakha Guidelines, which:

  • Bound employers to ensure safe, non-discriminatory workplaces.

  • Mandated mechanisms for complaint redressal.

  • Placed responsibility squarely on the employer.

The court also acknowledged the psychological impact of sexual harassment, the courage required for women to come forward, and the reality of police and judicial indifference.

The Implementation Gap

Despite the Vishakha judgment’s progressive vision, its implementation was patchy:

• Few employers complied fully with the directives.

• Many women remained reluctant to file complaints due to fear of retaliation, stigma, or lack of trust in the system.

• The State delayed passing comprehensive legislation to codify the guidelines into law.

Societal attitudes were slow to change, and the silence surrounding workplace harassment persisted — until another tragedy shattered the nation’s conscience.

The 2012 Delhi Gang Rape: A National Reckoning

On December 16, 2012, a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern was brutally gang-raped and assaulted by six men on a moving bus in Delhi. She died days later from her injuries, sparking unprecedented public outrage.

Key developments following the incident:

• Swift arrests of all accused.

• One accused died in police custody.

• The juvenile involved received three years in a reform facility under the Juvenile Justice Act.

• The remaining adult accused were convicted and sentenced to death.

This incident:

• Reignited debates on women’s safety.

• Pressured Parliament to act urgently.

• Drew global attention to India’s problem of gender-based violence.

Post-Nirbhaya Legal Reforms

1. Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013

• Gave legislative force to the Vishakha Guidelines.

• Made employer inaction a punishable offence.

• Mandated the creation of Internal Complaints Committees (ICC) in workplaces.

2. Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013

• Broadened the definition of sexual violence.

• Criminalised stalking and voyeurism.

• Increased penalties for sexual offences.

• Mandated faster trials for rape cases.

These measures were historic, but their efficacy remains debatable due to:

• Poor enforcement.

• Persistent victim-blaming attitudes.

• Institutional delays in justice delivery.

The Persistent Gap Between Law and Reality

Despite a more robust legal framework, women in India continue to face:

• Fear in public spaces — many still feel unsafe walking home alone at night.

• Victim shaming and disbelief — survivors are often doubted, especially if the accused are influential.

• Judicial delays — prolonged trials discourage survivors from pursuing justice.

• Continued impunity — perpetrators in many cases still evade justice.

The lived experiences of women show that laws on paper do not automatically translate to safety in practice.

The Caste and Class Dimension in Gender Justice

Bhanwari Devi’s case remains a stark reminder that gender justice in India is deeply intertwined with caste and class.

• Marginalised women face greater barriers in accessing justice.

• Prejudices in the police, medical, and judicial systems often reinforce societal discrimination.

• Laws may be universal, but implementation is uneven, with rural and marginalised women bearing the brunt.

Why the Fight is Far from Over

The authors of the article — Insiyah Vahanvaty and Ashish Bharadwaj — stress that justice in India often arrives only after unimaginable suffering.

• Vishakha exposed workplace neglect.

• The Delhi gang rape exposed the deadly gap between law and enforcement.

While both cases have driven legal reforms, they also show a troubling pattern: the State acts only after a public outcry following extreme violence.

This reactive approach means that protection for women is often delayed until the damage is irreversible. Laws may exist, but without consistent political will, societal change, and enforcement mechanisms, they remain underutilised.

Conclusion

The arc from Bhanwari Devi’s assault to the post-Nirbhaya legislative era tells a story of both progress and paralysis:

• Progress in the sense of landmark judgments and legislative enactments.

• Paralysis in the continued cultural resistance to gender equality, patchy enforcement, and systemic bias.

Bhanwari Devi’s legacy is more than her own struggle; it is a symbolic stake in the ground for all women in India demanding safety, dignity, and equality. But as the authors note, the fight is unfinished — though the path is lit.

5 Exam-Oriented Q&As

Q1. What was the significance of the Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan (1997) case?
A:

• It arose from the gang rape of Bhanwari Devi, a grassroots worker.

• The Supreme Court declared sexual harassment at the workplace a violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21.

• Introduced the Vishakha Guidelines, binding employers to ensure safe, non-discriminatory workplaces.

• Recognised workplace safety as a constitutional right.

Q2. What were the key shortcomings in implementing the Vishakha Guidelines before 2013?
A:

• Limited employer compliance.

• Lack of State action to codify the guidelines into law promptly.

• Fear of retaliation and stigma discouraged complaints.

• Persistent societal attitudes minimising sexual harassment.

Q3. How did the 2012 Delhi gang rape influence legislative change?
A:

• Triggered national outrage and mass protests.

• Led to swift arrests and high-profile convictions.

• Resulted in the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, expanding definitions of sexual offences, criminalising stalking and voyeurism, and increasing penalties.

• Spurred enactment of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013.

Q4. Why is the term “unfinished business of gender justice” used in the context of India?
A:

• Despite stronger laws, enforcement is inconsistent.

• Victims continue to face disbelief, stigma, and intimidation.

• Judicial delays and police apathy persist.

• Marginalised women face compounded challenges due to caste and class barriers.

Q5. What are the key differences between the pre- and post-2013 legal frameworks for women’s safety in India?
A:

• Pre-2013: Relied largely on Vishakha Guidelines and existing IPC provisions; no specific statutory law on workplace harassment.

• Post-2013: Sexual Harassment Act gave legislative force to Vishakha Guidelines; Criminal Law Amendment expanded sexual offence definitions and penalties.

• Greater emphasis on employer accountability, faster trials, and recognition of emerging offences like stalking.