The recent ruling by the Supreme Court of India recognises access to menstrual hygiene as part of fundamental rights, linking it to equality, dignity, privacy, and the right to education. The Court held that lack of sanitary products and proper school facilities forces many girls to miss classes, which amounts to structural discrimination under Article 14 and a violation of dignity under Article 21. It directed governments to provide free sanitary napkins, functional and private toilets, safe disposal systems, menstrual hygiene support spaces, and awareness through school curricula, making menstrual health a legal and educational priority rather than a welfare issue.
Click to View MoreThe Supreme Court's 2025 Amlesh Kumar vs State of Bihar ruling upheld the Selvi precedent: forced narco-analysis violates Articles 20(3) and 21. While test results are inadmissible, evidence discovered through the test may be admissible, emphasizing mental privacy and adherence to rights.
Click to View MoreAssam passed the Prohibition of Polygamy Bill, 2025, criminalizing polygamy with strict penalties and overriding personal laws except for Sixth Schedule areas and STs. The law promotes women’s dignity, reinforces monogamy, and moves the state closer to the UCC framework, creating a national precedent.
Click to View MoreAnti-conversion laws, meant to curb forced conversions, face constitutional challenges, particularly violating Article 21 (Right to Privacy and Choice). Critics argue vague terms and the reversed burden of proof lead to misuse against inter-faith couples and minorities. The Supreme Court must now balance individual liberty with the state's interest in public order.
Click to View MoreRising religious conflict in secular public spaces challenges constitutional religious freedom, which allows restrictions for public order ('principled distance'). Conflicts stem from disruption and communal tension. The judiciary uses 'Essential Religious Practices' and 'Constitutional Morality' for balance. Resolution demands uniform, non-discriminatory regulation, dialogue, and responsible devotion.
Click to View MoreGenerative AI threatens the Right to Privacy by collecting and processing personal data without clear consent. It increases risks of data leaks, inference-based profiling, and deepfakes. India’s DPDP Act, 2023 relies on consent, but AI’s complexity and broad public-data exemptions weaken its protective impact.
Click to View MoreDefamation laws in India balance free speech and reputation. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees expression, while Article 19(2) allows restrictions, including defamation. The Supreme Court upheld criminal defamation under Article 21, but judges now urge decriminalization to curb misuse and protect dissent.
Click to View More
© 2026 iasgyan. All right reserved