By Apurva Kandpal

Abstract

This article explores the influence of the “reasonable man standard” doctrine in the Indian justice system for using the defence “grave and sudden provocation” as a reference. It raises concerns about the application of stereotypes in the Indian judiciary and questions the absence of a corresponding standard that takes every factor into focus. The article examines the gender stereotypes and biases present in the gender-neutral laws in the Indian criminal system and the usage of the “battered woman syndrome” in cases of prolonged violence against women.

Introduction

The “reasonable man” concept derived from the English legal history, is used in the Indian courts to justify human behaviour and intention. It has consequently influenced judgements in determining guilt and mercy based on what a reasonable man would do in a situation. This raises concerns about stereotypes and their application in legal proceedings. Another important concern is the absence of a “reasonable woman” standard in the legal discourse. One can question, why is there only exists a reasonable man’s standard but not women’s. It’s not like women do not get charged with crimes. The rarity in application of the reasonable woman’s test can be traced back to historical gender biases or the very limited involvement of women in legal proceedings in the past. 

Reasonable Man’s Standard Test

The reasonable man standard test is used as a doctrine to determine whether an ordinary man would react to a particular situation the same way that the person, to whom the test is being applied did. What the courts fail to notice is that a person’s age and gender can play a huge role in deciding how one reacts. The law usually ignores specific roles of each element and focuses on a standard based on men’s experiences, values and morals as a reference for legal responsibility. “Grave and sudden provocation” under the Indian Penal Code has been used as a defence for murder to adjudge cases, which are based on the “reasonable man’s” doctrine. The defence uses elements like grave, sudden, and cool-off period to decide whether the doctrine can be applied or not. In our society, men have been stereotyped as strong, short-tempered, and aggressive. Therefore, it becomes easier for men to use this defence and partly get away with the punishment. Men in the past have used this defence in cases of infidelity. They have been given the defence of “grave and sudden provocation”, in cases where they have murdered their wives for infidelity. The stereotypes attached to men have helped them strengthen their case. While women on the other hand, rarely get to exercise the said defence. 

Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS), was first introduced by psychologist Lenore E. Walker in the 1970s. It has been used to study the psychological state of women who endure long-term violence. In the case of  R v. Ahluwalia, the woman was enduring extreme mental and physical abuse by her husband for years. She ended up burning her husband to death, at night, when he was sleeping. She pleaded manslaughter on the grounds that she did not intend to kill him and also asked for the defence of grave and sudden provocation for the torture her husband had caused her. The defence was not allowed and she was convicted of murder but later on, she was given a retrial when further evidence was brought up. The court brought up the case of battered women syndrome where they held that in cases of abused wives, the harmful act is the product of a slow-burn reaction, rather than a sudden loss of self-control. The longer the provocation is delayed, the less likely the defence is to succeed. The Jury convicted her of murder as they felt she did not act like a reasonable person and there was enough cool-down person for it to be sudden. They ignored the years of emotional and physical harassment she suffered due to her husband. Many scholars in India have argued in favour of amending the defence of “grave and sudden provocation” and adding provisions which support the battered woman syndrome. 

Setting Up of Dangerous Stereotypes

In our society, stereotypes produce generalizations or preconceptions which affect both men and women. Any failure to address and eliminate prejudices and stereotypes in society fosters a climate, which especially violates women’s rights. This encourages the spread of biases and harmful gender stereotypes to thrive which further degrades women. Gender stereotypes are social and cultural conceptions of men and women based on physical, biological, sexual and social roles. Women are controlled through social institutions like marriage and family. An example of such stereotypes is the concept of a female being under the control of her father as a child and then during marriage when the father “gives away” his daughter like a property and now the woman is under the control of her husband. A change in the traditional role of men as well as the role of women in society and the family is needed to achieve full equality between men and women. In order to tackle the pervasiveness of such stereotypes, more than the ability to appeal decisions is required. Naming the stereotype, understanding its form, exposing its harm and developing proper remedies for its elimination are all critical steps towards putting a stop to gender stereotypes. 

Indian criminal law largely consists of standards which have evolved through a male perspective. These standards are inherently discriminatory towards women’s rights. Similarly, the battered woman’s syndrome incorporates the gendered experiences of women into the legislation on “grave and sudden provocation”. At the same time, if its legal parameters are not properly defined and demarcated, courts would run the risk of labelling women as mentally ill and transferring the blame to the woman’s mental health. Instead, the emphasis should be on the patriarchy ingrained in societal structures and institutions which creates conditions for the woman to be subjected to domestic violence for a long period of time in the first place. The courts need to avoid gender-stereotyping, not doing so leads to denial of rights, discrimination, and exclusion. 

The violence perpetrated by men towards women and men being violent has now become a norm in our society which has led to violence against women by their partners a common practice. Historically, men have always felt this entitlement that they have the right to beat their wives in the smallest of issues. Many women who have become habitual to being hit by their husbands think that it is a punishment they deserve after making any mistake and a  right possessed by their husbands. All other forms of violence which occur in the public sphere have become criminal acts but violence that happens inside homes has stayed outside the purview of legal redressal. 

Author’s Bio

Apurva is a third-year law student at Jindal Global Law School. Her areas of interest are gender studies, intersectional feminism, queer theory, and criminal law. 

Image Source: https://soapboxie.com/government/The-Battered-Woman-Defence