A Feminist Critique of Judicial Insensitivity in Sexual Assault Cases

Abstract

: This paper examines judicial insensitivity in the adjudication of sexual offences in India and considers how patriarchal assumptions can contribute to secondary victimization within judicial proceedings. Using qualitative legal analysis, it examines statutory principles, judicial decisions, and institutional guidance, with particular attention to Aparna Bhat v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Akash v. State of U.P. The analysis identifies recurring concerns involving stereotypical assumptions, inappropriate bail conditions, restrictive interpretations of sexual violence, and tensions between subjective judicial morality and constitutional guarantees of equality and dignity. It further highlights an implementation gap between higher judicial directives and adjudicative practices. The paper argues that meaningful reform requires continuous gender-sensitization training, stronger institutional accountability, and wider adoption of trauma-informed judicial practices consistent with Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.