Overview
The Supreme Court has intensified its focus on gender‑sensitive judicial language. After the Chief Justice of India Surya Kant criticised the 2024 Handbook on Judgments and Gender as “technical and Harvard‑oriented”, a revised version was released in August 2026. The new handbook urges judges to use language that respects gender equality.
Key Developments
- February 2026 – CJI Surya Kant flags the handbook’s shortcomings.
- August 2026 – Revised Handbook published, emphasizing sensitivity in judgments.
- October 7, 2026 – Justice Lalitha Kanneganti directs the Karnataka High Court to replace the term ‘visitation’ with ‘parenting time’ in child‑custody orders.
- 2025 – Supreme Court condemns insensitive remarks by an Allahabad High Court judge in a POCSO case, prompting handbook revision.
Important Facts
The 2026 handbook analysed 125 trial‑court judgments across states. While it noted a “modern, gender‑sensitive judicial approach”, it also recorded persistent use of patriarchal phrases such as ‘real victim’ and ‘rape myths’. Past measures—training at judicial academies and reference to international guides like the 2022 Bangkok General Guidance—have had limited impact.
The shift from ‘visitation’ to ‘parenting time’ is more than semantic. It challenges the entrenched belief that mothers are the natural caregivers and fathers are merely ‘visitors’. By recognising both parents as active caregivers, the judgment aligns with the objectives of the Feminist Judgments Project, which advocates a substantive, not just formal, equality.
Exam Relevance
Understanding judicial language reforms is essential for GS‑2 (Polity) and GS‑4 (Ethics). Aspirants should note how the judiciary interprets constitutional guarantees of equality (Article 14) and how gender‑sensitive language can influence the delivery of justice. The case also illustrates the role of high courts in shaping social policy, a frequent UPSC topic.
Way Forward
- Broader adoption of the revised handbook across all courts, not just selective cases.
- Systematic monitoring of judgments for gender‑biased terminology.
- Increased representation of women and marginalized communities on the bench to identify hidden biases.
- Integration of feminist analytical tools, as promoted by the Feminist Judgments Project, into judicial training.
- Extension of sensitivity reviews to other domains—disability, caste, tribal issues—to dismantle structural barriers.
Only a sustained, systemic approach can move the judiciary from isolated, context‑specific changes to a nationwide culture of gender‑sensitive jurisprudence.