He went on to detail how the Supreme Court has, over the past few years, moved beyond manifest forms of discrimination and has engaged with the binary division of gender into men and women, gendered notions of certain professions, and discrimination on the basis of gender – in the workplace, within the confines of one’s homes, or in the society, among others.
Reference in this regard was made to the judgment in Babita Puniya v. Secretary, Ministry of Defence concerning the denial of Permanent Commission to women officers in the Armed Forces.
He also cited Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India, in which the apex court struck down the discriminatory provisions of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 which prohibited men under the age of 25 years and “any woman” in premises where liquor or drugs were consumed.
“The Supreme Court has realized that it is not merely enough that women are granted the opportunity to sit on the table, but also to ensure that their lived experiences are factored in to ensure that they can avail such opportunities,” he said.
He also highlighted the Supreme Court’s focus on intersectional discrimination, where many factors including gender, caste and disability play a role.
“These factors do not operate in isolation and are deeply imbedded in our society. The only possible way of creating a more inclusive society is to recognize these causes of discrimination through our judicial work and even in our every day lives,” the judge said.
Source: Barandbench
