The Chief Justice was delivering a speech at a lecture honouring India’s 19th Chief Justice, ES Venkataramaiah, at National Law School of India University in Bengaluru.
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud explained that privacy cannot be a “cloak for infringement of rights” and that legislation must address gender disparity that still exists in households. The Chief Justice was delivering a speech at the National Law School of India University in Bengaluru, honouring ES Venkataramaiah, the country’s 19th Chief Justice. Justice BV Nagarathna, the daughter of Justice Venkataramiah, is a judge on the Supreme Court and soon to be the first female Chief Justice of India. The Chief Justice stated during his memorial address that more has to be done to ensure that people are protected in both public and private settings. He went on to say that he will be examining gender discrimination from both the public and private spheres.
According to the Indian Penal Code, it is considered a crime when two or more people engage in physical altercations that disrupt public order. “This is only illegal in public places; it is not illegal anywhere else. Hence, the main focus of the law is not only the benefits or drawbacks of brawls themselves, but also the location of their occurrence. The Chief Justice stated that a society governed by a constitution must be comprehensive and open to seeing beyond the distinction between public and private domains. He claimed that for a number of years, feminist and economic criticism of our laws has been built around this division between public and private spheres. The Chief Justice said, “For freedom of expression to truly exist, it has to exist in both these spaces.”
“We would be failing in the promise of equal protection under the law and qualifying it with a caveat based on the location of wrongdoing if the hierarchy remains in the private sphere and the law turns a blind eye in the name of the household’s sanctity. This will be a watered-down definition of privacy. It is not a cover for rights violations,” the Chief Justice declared.
A housewife who is not paid for her work uses her household as a place of business, according to Chief Justice Chandrachud. “In public spaces, women are restricted to specific service-oriented and frequently sexualized professions; hence, both parties have rights that are violated. But if the law decides to solely meddle in the latter, i.e., public space, then it is wrong,” he stated.
“When we are prepared and eager to see above the presumptions that society has instilled in us, a sense of fairness emerges. The Chief Justice stated, “We are only likely to feel the need to stray from these fundamental presumptions in order to create our own sense of justice when we have an open mind. Spatial restrictions have been eliminated by technology, he claimed, and regulations now need to “identify the oppressor and the oppressed, regardless of where they are.”
“The old notion that what men do is public, and what women do is private has no application in society governed by constitutions,” he said, adding, “Does the law give the person the same benefits as a corporate employee when a home is a site of economic employment for a house help?”
“This issue is particularly pronounced for Indian women, especially those belonging to a marginalised community,” he stated in reference to the gender pay disparity in India. Women continue to earn less money than males do, even though they have made important contributions to a variety of professional fields.”
