Gender Justice in Indian Jurisprudence: A Comparative Analysis of Contemporary Masculinist Legal Thought and Modern Feminist Jurisprudence

Abstract

Gender justice has emerged as one of the most dynamic and contested areas of contemporary Indian jurisprudence. While feminist jurisprudence has significantly influenced constitutional interpretation, legislative reforms, and judicial reasoning by exposing structural inequalities experienced by women, recent legal discourse has increasingly engaged with questions concerning men's rights, gender-neutral legislation, shared parental responsibilities, misuse of legal processes, and the broader implications of constitutional equality for all genders. These developments have contributed to the emergence of contemporary masculinist legal thought as an area of scholarly inquiry rather than a settled school of jurisprudence. This article critically examines the philosophical foundations of contemporary masculinist legal thought and compares them with modern feminist jurisprudence within the framework of the Indian Constitution. It argues that Indian constitutionalism does not endorse gender privilege for any class but instead aspires to achieve substantive equality, dignity, and justice through Articles 14, 15, 16, and 21. By analysing constitutional principles, judicial developments, and contemporary legal scholarship, the article evaluates whether Indian jurisprudence is moving towards a more inclusive and gender-responsive model of justice. It concludes that future legal reform should neither abandon the achievements of feminist jurisprudence nor disregard emerging concerns relating to gender neutrality, but instead develop a balanced constitutional framework capable of protecting the dignity and equality of every individual irrespective of gender.