‘Indian Women Are Vulnerable And They Need Women-Enabling Laws’: Experts Discuss Atul Subhash Suicide Case At Legally Speaking Dialogue

At the Legally Speaking dialogue on “Prenup, Divorce & Inheritance,” legal experts discussed the balance between protecting women through empowering laws and addressing concerns of misuse. The conversation, framed around the tragic suicide of Atul Subhash, highlighted a recurring issue: why must the narrative around women-enabling laws constantly be framed in defense of their necessity?

With panelists Malvika Rajotia, Manali Bhandari, and Alkanshree Dahar weighing in, the conversation explored the challenges of upholding justice while maintaining focus on the original intent behind these laws.

Key Takeaways

• Women-enabling laws address systemic injustices but face disproportionate scrutiny for misuse.
• Isolated cases of misuse should not overshadow their necessity.
• Judicial reform and fair implementation are crucial to ensuring justice for all.
• The narrative around these laws must shift from defense to empowerment.

The Tragic Case of Atul Subhash

The discussion began with the case of Atul Subhash, who allegedly died by suicide, accusing his wife and in-laws of harassment. This incident reignited public debates on the misuse of laws like Section 498A, often referred to in allegations of cruelty against women.

Alkanshree Dahar, Founder and Managing Partner of Law Offices of India, emphasized the need for a balanced approach,“The fact Atul committed suicide was unfortunate, but you cannot say that his wife and in-laws should be put behind bars. It depends upon the facts of the case. But we cannot say that laws are being misused.”

While Dahar acknowledged the Supreme Court’s recognition of the misuse of 498A, she underscored the broader picture, “Indian women are vulnerable, and they need these laws. We have all the laws, but we need a robust judiciary and better implementation so people—be it the husband or wife—get justice.”

Atul Subhash Case: Misuse Should Not Define Women’s Laws

Advocate Manali Bhandari highlighted the historical context of women-enabling laws and cautioned against letting isolated cases of misuse dominate the discourse, “We must not lose sight that all these laws came into existence because there were atrocities against women in our country, such as dowry deaths. There may be some amount of misuse, but we should not take away from the fact that a large number of women are still suffering.”

Bhandari further criticized media trials, which often sensationalize cases without considering all perspectives. “A fair chance should be given to the wife’s family to respond and see what actually happened,” she added, urging for a more nuanced understanding of such incidents.

A Larger Narrative of Misuse?

Malvika Rajotia, Founder of Rajkotia Associates Advocates, challenged the disproportionate scrutiny applied to women-centric laws, compared to other areas of legal misuse.

“Ever since women-enabling laws have been passed, we’ve been hearing a shouting echo of misuse. Yet, when politicians are framed for murder or businessmen are charged by the ED, nobody is talking about the misuse of those laws,” she argued.

Rajotia pointed out how framing discussions about women’s protections within the context of misuse undermines their legitimacy.

“To identify women’s cause and neutralize that battle with the argument of misuse must be removed from the narrative. Let’s not talk about misuse of laws only among women’s issues. Why do we have to get defensive about women-enabling laws?”

Judicial Reforms: The Way Forward

While opinions differed on the nuances, the panelists unanimously called for judicial reforms and stronger implementation to ensure justice. Dahar emphasized the need for a more robust system:

“We need a judiciary that ensures justice for all, whether it’s the husband or the wife. The laws are there, but their implementation must improve.”

The conversation highlighted the need to move away from a defensive stance on women-enabling laws. These protections were designed to address systemic injustices, and while no legal framework is immune to misuse, it is unjust to allow these rare instances to overshadow their purpose.

By reframing the narrative, society can focus on strengthening judicial mechanisms and addressing inequities without undermining the hard-won protections for women. As Rajotia aptly put it, “Why do we have to get defensive about women-enabling laws? Let’s ensure they serve their purpose instead of debating their existence.”

Also Read: WATCH | Kapil Sibal Strong Statement On Minorities In Bangladesh And India At Legally Speaking