NEW DELHI: CJI Surya Kant on Tuesday virtually discarded the ‘Handbook on Combating Gender Stereotypes’, published by Supreme Court in 2023 under the initiative of Harvard-educated CJI D Y Chandrachud to sensitise and assist judges and lawyers about gender-unjust terms, as too technical and Harvard-oriented to be of any assistance to rape survivors and commoners.During the proceedings in a suo motu case taking cognisance of insensitivity of an Allahabad HC judgment that had ruled ‘grabbing the breasts’ and ‘loosening the pyjama string’ did not amount to attempt to rape, a bench of the CJI and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and N V Anjaria said the handbook gave forensic meanings to different aspects of sexual assault, which may not be understood by the rape survivor, her relatives or commoners.”It is too Harvard-oriented,” the CJI said and the bench asked National Judicial Academy in Bhopal to constitute a panel comprising domain experts, academicians and lawyers to revisit the issue, frame a guideline and submit a report to the apex court. “We will take assistance of lawyers, including amicus curiae Shobha Gupta and senior advocate H S Phoolka, to fine-tune it,” the bench said.Once it was finalised, NJA should make it the study material for HC judges, who could be called in batches and trained about the sensitivities required while dealing with sexual assault cases, the CJI said, and added, “It serves no purpose to sermonise the HC judges sitting in the Supreme Court. They must get practical training at NJA.”The bench set aside the decision by Allahabad HC on March 17, 2025 – that had differentiated between the preparation for a crime and the attempt to commit the crime – and asked the trial court to proceed against the two accused.The HC’s decision had sparked an uproar and SC on March 26 last year took suo motu cognisance of the judgment and stayed it, while expressing its anguish at the insensitivity shown by the high court judge.In the foreword of the handbook, then CJI Chandrachud had written, “The Handbook identifies common stereotypes about women, many of which have been utilised by courts in the past and demonstrates why they are inaccurate and how they may distort the application of the law. The intention is not to criticise or cast doubt on past judgments but merely to show how stereotypes may unwittingly be employed. Finally, it encapsulates the current doctrine on key legal issues which may be relevant while adjudicating certain cases, particularly those concerning sexual violence.”
