Women in law have seen great progress over the last 100 years in India. The first woman lawyer, Cornelia Sorabji, was entitled to practice in 1924. Since then, the number of women lawyers has increased, several women have been designated Senior Advocates, and there have been many women judges in the lower judiciary. However, there remains a glass ceiling for women in the higher judiciary.
The judicial appointments made by the Chandrachud-led Collegium become an interesting point of analysis, especially in the context of gender equality. In this piece, we seek to analyse the extent to which he was able to get more women in the higher judiciary. The Supreme Court started publishing all resolutions of the Collegium since October 2017 on the Supreme Court’s website.
This book is part of our “Equality Now!” series of four resource books,…
When the gender gap in the higher judiciary is raised, the responses often range from there not being enough women lawyers to choose from, that merit cannot be compromised, or that women are not interested.
In this opinion piece, published by Gaysi, Rajeev Anand Kushwah explores the understanding of Allyship, exploring what constitutes effective allyship, and what support straight allies can extend to queer movements and communities.
CLPR Executive Director Jayna Kothari writes for the Indian Express on the recent Supreme Court judgement which expanded the abortion rights of women and persons who require safe medical termination of pregnancies. She argued that the judgement upheld the right of all women and girls to make reproductive choices for themselves, without undue interference from the state. She emphasised that any deprivation of reproductive healthcare services negatively affects the dignity of women.
In this article published by the Indian Express, Jayna Kothari examines the recent split verdict by the Delhi High Court on the criminalisation of marital rape.
A legislation drafted by CLPR which provides the legal framework to prevent, investigate and adjudicate crimes in the name of ‘honour’ and protect individual liberty.
In this article published by the Hindu, Jayna Kothari, examines the regressive exception to marital rape in light of the recent Karnataka High Court judgment.
Jayna Kothari has contributed a chapter titled “Is the Supreme Court cherry-picking its gender battles? ” in Tanja Herklotz and Siddharth Peter de Souza, ” Mutinies for Equality: Contemporary Developments in Law & Gender in India” published by Cambridge University Press.
In this article published by Indian Express, Jayna Kothari, Senior Advocate & Executive Director at Center for Law and Policy Research argues that the recent Priya Ramani judgment has expanded the law on sexual harassment and provided the opportunity to widen the defences against defamation law. Most importantly, she states that now, victimisation should also be recognised as a form of sexual harassment and discrimination.
In this blog post, Thulasi K. Raj argues that the exclusion of sexual minorities from blood donations is violative of non-discrimination under Articles 14 and 15.
CLPR’s draft Equality Bill 2021 takes a new step in addressing discrimination experienced by people on the basis of caste, gender, religion, transgender and intersex identity, disability and other grounds. It aims to promote equality, prohibit different types of discriminatory conduct, provide adequate civil remedies and set up fora for redressal that are accessible and effective in addressing discrimination.
In this article published by Deccan Herald, Jayna Kothari, Senior Advocate & Executive Director at Center for Law and Policy Research argued that proposed laws prohibiting the practice of ‘love jihad’ violate the constitutional guarantees of the right to life and liberty under the Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Writing for the Deccan Herald, Senior Advocate Jayna Kothari responds to recent controversy concerning Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi. With a review of the present state of justice when it comes to violence against women, she argues that the problem lies in implementation.
Contributing to The Print’s Talk Point, Satya Prasoon argues that the Supreme Court of India must embrace “substantive due process”, in order to regain credibility. The Supreme Court is an credibility crisis after sexual harassment allegations were raised against the Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi.
Jayna Kothari, Maya Unnithan and Siri Gloppen note how political parties have been virtually silent on sexual and reproductive rights policy, in the on-going 2019 general election. They urge political parties to “steer the public debate to [often overlooked] crucial issues”.
In this article Jayna Kothari argues that – In the last few years, public interest litigation at India’s Supreme Court has brought significant wins for human rights—but success is best assured when litigation is linked to broader mobilization.
In this article in The Times of India, Thulasi K. Raj and Kaleeswaram Raj argue that the judgment in Joseph Shine v. Union of India contributes to developing the doctrine of unprincipled criminalisation.
As part of our collaborative work with Centre for Reproductive Rights, we translated easy-to-understand FAQ Brochures on Child Marriage for our outreach in Karnataka. The brochure contains the relevant legal framework around Child Marriage in India.
As part of our collaborative work with Centre for Reproductive Rights, we translated easy-to-understand Posters on Child Marriage for our outreach in Karnataka. The poster contains the relevant legal framework around Child Marriage in India.
As part of our collaborative work with Centre for Reproductive Rights, we disseminated easy-for-reference Posters on Child Marriage for our outreach. The poster contains the relevant legal framework around Child Marriage in India.
As part of our collaborative work with Centre for Reproductive Rights, we disseminated FAQ Brochures on Child Marriage for our outreach. The brochure contains the relevant legal framework around Child Marriage in India.
What are the key challenges with child marriage law in India? What are the implementation gaps? Read CLPR and CRR’s Policy Brief on Child Marriage to know more about the challenges and policy recommendations.
In this article in The Hindu, Thulasi K. Raj argues that the right to sexual privacy is significant in the discussion on decriminalising adultery.
In this piece, Jayna Kothari and Payal Shah, analyse the Independent Thought judgment. They suggest policy and law reforms to translate this decision into respecting the bodily autonomy of every woman and girl.
A little more than a month ago, on 17th Oct 2017, in the Child Marriage and Marital Rape [Independent Thought vs Union of India] case the Supreme Court ruled that sexual intercourse or sexual acts between a man and his minor wife was marital rape. In legal terms the Supreme Court had read down Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code. This exception had deemed that a man could not be accused of marital rape if he had marital intercourse with his minor wife as long as the wife was not below the age of 15. Reading down the exception now meant that this exception would not apply to cases where the wife was between 15yrs and 18yrs.
Disha Chaudhry wrote about the reasoning behind this judgement in the Oxford Human Rights Hub.
In this Article published in the Kannada Daily, Prajaavaani, Jayna Kothari critiques the decision of the Supreme Court holding Section 2(q) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, to be unconstitutional. The impugned section defines “respondents” under the Act to only include “adult males”, thus allowing aggrieved persons under the Act to file a case only against adult male relatives.
Jayna Kothari argues that provisions of the Domestic Violence Act are not meant to be construed as gender neutral. She elaborates how it is necessary and intentional that legal provisions on violence against women should apply only to males as perpetrators of such violence.
In this article in the Deccan Herald, Thulasi K. Raj explains the issues of gender justice and religious freedom revolving around the Sabarimala case.
This article, reviews the performance of Special Courts established under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act 2012. Using empirical data, from a study conducted by the Centre for Law and Policy Research, the author exposes the failure of these courts in meeting their objective.
Nina de Puy Kamp who interned with CLPR has an article on granting interim compensation to rape victims in Karnataka published Deccan Herald. (September 21,2015)
This article provides an insight into the performance of fast track courts set up for sexual harassment in Karnataka. The authors analyse the performance of such courts on the basis of an empirical study conducted by them.
Fast track courts have often been mooted as a solution to the extensive delays that plague the functioning of “normal” courts in India. In 2012 a special court to exclusively try cases of child sexual abuse under the “Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (“POCSO”)” was set up. In 2013, the Karnataka state government set up 10 special fast track courts in the state only for trying cases of rape and sexual assault against women under Section 376, IPC.
The Justice J.S Verma Committee Report had recommended the setting up of Fast Track courts for dealing with rape and sexual assault as a way to ensure speedy justice. In this article, the authors conducted a detailed study of the working of three such courts in Bangalore that were set up in December, 2013 and examine whether these courts live up to their objective. The article makes a case for the need for witness protection services, so as to safeguard the interests of the victim of sexual assault before and after they have provided evidence.
This report argues for the introduction of a judicial remedy in the form of a cause of action against police officers in their individual capacity for violations of constitutional rights. This recommendation was made in light of the government’s failure to implement the reforms mandated by the Supreme Court in Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 1
Sudhir Krishnaswamy proposes a reading down of the Supreme Court judgment in Suresh Kaushal v. Naz Foundation so that it would have the effect of encouraging prosecutors not to target consensual homosexual activity.
In this article, Jayna Kothari has brought to light the manner in which guidelines on sexual harassment laid down by the Supreme Court in the Vishakha judgment are being flouted. She also talks about the inherent bias in the legal profession against women lawyers and the need to recognize such biases while interpreting the law in relation to sexual harassment.
The India at LSE Blog has featured a guest post by Jayna Kothari on the Madras High Court judgment of Aysha v Ozir Hassan. This judgment had made headlines for suggesting that couples who have premarital sex can be considered to be married. In her post, Jayna argues that contrary to the popular understanding, this judgment strengthens the position of women in relationships akin to marriage.
Chaya’s six-year-old legal battle to search for her roots came to a fruitful end this week. The Karnataka High Court allowed her petition and directed the police to investigate the details of her biological mother and the conditions under which she was given up for adoption by the orphanage. This article examines this case in the light of a person’s right to know her biological or genetic origins.
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 aims to provide women with quick decisions on protection, residence, maintenance and child custody. This is an account of how the best intentions of the law are thwarted in the process of implementation.
Every legal system has its own story and unique experiences with the sexual harassment law. This article engages in a comparative study of sexual harassment in India and Israel, which seem to share a very similar trajectory. This article tracks the processes that shaped the reforms in both countries and uncovers significant similarities and differences in the Indian and Israeli sexual harassment law. It suggests that while the Israeli law is more robust in both its substantive scope and its enforcement, it has for this very reason, also experienced a significant backlash which is, interestingly not traced in the Indian context.
Jayna Kothari and Daphne Barak Erez have published an essay titled ‘When Sexual Harassment Law Goes East: Feminism, Legal Transplantation and Social Change’ (Stanford Journal of International Law, Issue 47, p. 177, 2011).
This article analyses the role of the criminal law system in dealing with domestic violence. It argues that Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code can only be effectively implemented if a new model of policing and a victim empowerment criminal law model is developed.
Filter by
By Types
CLPR on behalf of Women’s Voice, an organization which works specifically for rights of marginalized women filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court challenging the order dated 15.03.2022 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition No. 2347 of 2022. The Judgment not only held that the wearing of Hijab by Muslim women does not form a part of essential religious practice in Islamic faith, but also that the prescription of school uniforms which prohibit head scarves is a reasonable restriction and that it does not violate Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Constitution of India, and that the Government Order dated 05.02.2022 which prohibits head scarves in universities is valid
This Writ Petition was filed by a 24 years old married woman seeking permission of the High Court to terminate her pregnancy of over 30 weeks as the fetus suffered from multiple abnormalities. By order dated 31.10.2019, the Hon’ble High Court permitted the Petitioner to seek termination of her pregnancy, in recognition of her rights under Article 21 of the Constitution and the mental trauma that is likely to be caused to her on account of the fetal abnormalities, if the termination is not permitted.
The present petition has been filed by Saraswati Kumar, a minor aged 15 years seeking annulment of her marriage under Section 3 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (PCMA) as it was solemnized when she was a minor and she was forcefully taken away from the custody of her parents.
CLPR represented the intervenor Vimochana in the Supreme Court and challenged the constitutionality of the offence of adultery under Section 497 of the IPC. We argued against adultery as an offence by invoking the fundamental right to privacy and argued that the right to intimate association is a facet of privacy which is protected under the Constitution. The Supreme Court unanimously struck down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code as being violative of Articles 14. 15 & 21 of the Constitution.
28th
Jun 2025
Venue Westminster, ITC Windsor, Bengaluru
Time 11:00 AM - 2:00 PM
22nd
Mar 2025
Venue Sabha Bengaluru No.44/A, Kamaraj Rd
Time March 22: 2:00 PM - 5:30 PM & March 23: 10:00 AM - 1:30 PM
08th
Mar 2025
Venue Sabha Bengaluru No.44/A, Kamaraj Rd
Time 5:00 PM
16th
Dec 2024
Venue The Lalit Fire Brigade Lane, Barakhamba, New Delhi, Delhi 110001
Time 6:30 pm - 8:00 pm
Supreme Court Observer
A two-day national consultation organised by the Centre for Law and Policy Research was held in Bengaluru on 22 and 23 March to address this issue. Titled “Equal Justice: Securing Equal Inclusion of Women in the Higher Judiciary,” the consultation comprised four panel discussions which highlighted the systemic barriers that hinder women’s advancement in the judiciary.
Live Law
When Justice Kant enquired as to when the elections in the High Court Bar and District Bar were scheduled in the state, Senior Advocate Jayna Kothari, appearing for the Karnataka Federation of Women Lawyers, informed that women lawyers had secured Treasurer plus 30% EC posts in the High Court Bar. The issue only remained with respect to district bar associations, Kothari said, of which elections are upcoming. Accordingly, the Court passed its order.
The Hindu
The Centre for Law and Policy Research (CLPR) hosted a national consultation titled ‘Equal Justice: Securing Equal Inclusion of Women in the Higher Judiciary’ on Saturday and Sunday at Sabha, Bengaluru.
Deccan Herald
The underrepresentation of women in the higher judiciary remains a major issue in India, where women constitute only 14.27% of high court judges and 6 per cent of Supreme Court judges, according to the Centre for Law and Policy Research (CLPR).
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA) safeguards women against acts of domestic violence. Whether trans women, who are assigned male at birth but identify their gender identity as female would be able to seek protection under the PWDVA, is of significance.
On June 28th, 2025, CLPR organised a Roundtable in Bangalore with senior women lawyers from the corporate bar to examine the emergence of a judiciary pathway for corporate women lawyers and address the challenges of securing gender inclusion within the judiciary. This is part of CLPR’s ongoing Equal Justice initiative to aiming to address the gender gap in the higher judiciary.
On 22nd and 23rd of March, 2024, the Centre for Law and Policy Research (CLPR) organised a 2-day National Consultation to analyse systemic barriers that hinder women’s advancement to leadership positions in the judiciary and discuss legal and institutional reforms that can promote gender equality.
On December 10th, the Centre for Law and Policy Research convened a Roundtable Consultation in Mumbai with women lawyers from the Aurangabad, Bombay, and Nagpur benches of the Bombay High Court.
