New Delhi, September 5, 2023 – In a notable legal development, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma, delivered a critical observation on Tuesday, asserting that presumptions based on gender have no place within the justice system unless explicitly established by law. The case in question was titled “The State Govt of NCT Of Delhi versus Babita & Ors.”
Justice Sharma’s statement highlighted the potential detriment of gender-based presumptions, underlining their potential to undermine the quest for truth and justice. The High Court issued this directive in response to a trial court order that suggested “female members” could not have participated in offenses related to a case involving allegations of assault, kidnapping, and attempted murder.
The Delhi High Court expressed its concern, stating, “The trial court in the present case has given no reasons as to what led it to believe at this stage, to assume on its own, that the ‘female members’ could not have participated in the commission of the offense despite there being specific allegations leveled and specific roles attributed to them by the victim himself as recorded in the FIR and statement of the independent witnesses.”
The trial court had previously framed charges against five male defendants while discharging five female defendants due to a lack of evidence demonstrating their instigation of the male accused. The State contested this decision before the High Court.
Justice Sharma emphasized that favoring a female accused without substantial basis or valid grounds contradicts the fundamental principles of the justice system. The judge further reinforced that the legal system relies on an impartial evaluation of facts rather than preconceived notions.
“Our legal system is founded on the principle of gender neutrality unless otherwise provided, where each individual, regardless of their gender, is held accountable for their actions in accordance with the law. Presumptions based on gender have no place within this framework unless provided by law, as they undermine the pursuit of truth and justice,” the Court asserted.
The High Court underscored that the presumption in favor of the female accused was made by the trial court during the charge framing stage, which solely aims to determine whether a prima facie case exists or not.
Additionally, the High Court noted discrepancies in the trial court’s order, which directed “all lady accused persons” to furnish bail bonds under Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Justice Sharma pointed out that such an approach does not align with the judicial philosophy of gender equality and emphasized the importance of naming individuals discharged from the case rather than referring to them by gender.
Consequently, the Delhi High Court set aside the trial court’s order and remanded the case back to the trial court for further proceedings.
Justice Sharma also directed the circulation of the judgment among all Judicial Officers and the Director (Academics) of the Delhi Judicial Academy to ensure the recognition of its contents.
The State was represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Manoj Pant, while the respondents (accused) appeared in person during the proceedings.
