The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday (August 16) released a handbook laying out a detailed glossary of gender-unjust terms that it suggested must not be used in court language.

The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday (August 16) released a handbook laying out a detailed glossary of gender-unjust terms that it suggested must not be used in court language. It mentioned a list of words that perpetuate gender stereotypes and must be avoided while drafting pleadings as well as in orders and judgments. Along with the unjust terms, it also released a list of alternative words which it deemed more accurate or appropriate. “The Handbook on Combating Gender Stereotypes aims to assist judges and the legal community in identifying, understanding and combating stereotypes about women. It contains a glossary of gender-unjust terms and suggests alternative words or phrases which may be used while drafting pleadings as well as orders and judgments,” Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said. Watch: Supreme Court: Financial penalties must be proportionate to profits | India × The handbook noted how several gender-unjust terms were unfairly utilised by courts in the past. It also tried to justify why their use was considered inappropriate and why it may distort the application of the law. Also read: India`s Supreme Court files complaint against fake WhatsApp forwards under CJI`s name “Stereotypes are typically held against individuals by virtue of their membership of a group. They are assumptions or beliefs that individuals belonging to specific social groups have certain characteristics or traits”, the handbook read. Here is the list of words identified as gender-unjust by the Supreme Court along with the alternate recommended phrase. Gender-unjust terms Alternative (appropriate) language Adulteress Woman who has engaged in sexual relations outside of marriage Affair Relationship outside of marriage Bastard Non-marital child or a child whose parents were not married Biological sex/biological male/biological female Sex assigned at birth Born a girl/boy Assigned female/male at birth Career woman Woman Carnal intercourse Sexual intercourse Chaste woman Woman Child prostitute Child who has been trafficked Concubine/keep Woman with whom a man has had romantic or sexual relations outside of marriage Dutiful wife/faithful wife/good wife/obedient wife Wife Easy virtue (e.g a woman of easy virtue) Woman Effeminate (when used pejoratively) Accurately describe the characteristic using a gender neutral term (e.g confident or responsible) Eve teasing Street sexual harassment Faggot Accurately describe the individual's sexual orientation (e.g homosexual or bisexual Fallen woman Woman Feminine hygiene products Menstrual products Forcible rape Rape Harlot Woman Hermaphrodite Intersex Hooker Sex worker Hormonal (to describe a woman's emotional state) Use a gender neutral term to describe the emotion (e.g compassionate or enthusiastic) Housewife Homemaker Indian woman/western woman Woman Ladylike Use a gender neutral description of behaviour or characteristics (e.g amusing or assertive) Layabout/Shirker Unemployed Marriageable age A woman who has attained the legal age required to marry Mistress Woman with whom a man has had romantic or sexual relations outside of marriage Prostitute Sex worker Provider/Breadwinner Employed or earning Provocative clothing/dress Clothing/dress Ravished (e.g she was “ravished” by him) Sexually harassed/assaulted or raped Seductress Woman Sex change Sex reassignment or gender transition Slut Woman Spinster Unmarried woman Transsexual Transgender Transvestite Cross-dresser Unwed mother Mother Violated (e.g he violated her) Sexually harassed/assaulted or raped Whore Woman Woman of loose morals/easy virtue/promiscuous woman/wanton woman Woman Survivor or victim? The handbook noted that an individual who has been affected by sexual violence may identify themselves as either a “survivor” or “victim”. Both terms are applicable unless the individual has expressed a preference in which case the individual's preference should be respected. WATCH WION LIVE HERE ×

'Housewife, ladylike': India Supreme Court gives alternatives to words that stereotype women

The matter for the CBSE remaining board exams has been adjourned for the time being and would be heard on June 25.

India: Supreme Court to take final call over class 10th, 12th board exams

All migrant workers are to be identified and transported back to their home towns within 15 days, the Supreme Court ordered all states today.

India: Send stranded migrants to their homes in 15 days, says Top court

The Supreme Court of India has rejected a plea seeking its approval for the termination of the&nbsp;pregnancy of a 10-year-old rape survivor who is 32-weeks (eight months) pregnant.

The bench, comprising Chief Justice JS Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud, had asked Chandigarh&#39;s Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGI) to examine the rape survivor and the consequences if the termination of pregnancy was allowed.

It took note of the report of the medical board set up by PGI&nbsp;that termination of pregnancy was neither good for the girl nor for the foetus.

The court also suggested that the federal government set up a permanent medical board in each state to take prompt decisions in such cases.&nbsp;

The bench asked Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar to consider its suggestion&nbsp;in view of the fact that the frequency of such cases before the top court had increased.

The PIL was filed after a Chandigarh district court on July 18 refused to let the girl undergo the abortion after it was confirmed that she was 26 weeks pregnant.

Her advocate Alakh Alok Srivastava had argued before the court that as per doctors, the pelvic bones of the girl were not fully developed and a full-term pregnancy at her tender age was extremely risky. 
 
Courts allow medical termination of pregnancy up to 20 weeks under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act. Exception can be made if the foetus is genetically abnormal.

The petition had requested the top court to frame appropriate guidelines to set up a permanent medical board in each district of India for expedient termination of pregnancies in exceptional cases involving child rape survivors and under the best-possible medical facilities.

It had also asked the top court to direct the government to amend Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, so as to permit termination of pregnancy of more than 20 weeks, particularly involving child rape survivors after obtaining the opinion of a permanently constituted medical board.

The girl was allegedly repeatedly raped by her maternal uncle, a hotel worker, over the past few months. He has been arrested.

Her father is a watchman and mother works as a domestic help.

The top court considered the report of the medical board that termination of pregnancy was neither good for the girl nor for the foetus

The Supreme Court of India has rejected a plea seeking its approval for the termination of the pregnancy of a 10-year-old rape survivor who is 32-weeks (eight months) pregnant. The bench, comprising Chief Justice JS Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud, had asked Chandigarh's Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGI) to examine the rape survivor and the consequences if the termination of pregnancy was allowed. It took note of the report of the medical board set up by PGI that termination of pregnancy was neither good for the girl nor for the foetus. The court also suggested that the federal government set up a permanent medical board in each state to take prompt decisions in such cases. The bench asked Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar to consider its suggestion in view of the fact that the frequency of such cases before the top court had increased. The PIL was filed after a Chandigarh district court on July 18 refused to let the girl undergo the abortion after it was confirmed that she was 26 weeks pregnant. Her advocate Alakh Alok Srivastava had argued before the court that as per doctors, the pelvic bones of the girl were not fully developed and a full-term pregnancy at her tender age was extremely risky. Courts allow medical termination of pregnancy up to 20 weeks under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act. Exception can be made if the foetus is genetically abnormal. The petition had requested the top court to frame appropriate guidelines to set up a permanent medical board in each district of India for expedient termination of pregnancies in exceptional cases involving child rape survivors and under the best-possible medical facilities. It had also asked the top court to direct the government to amend Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, so as to permit termination of pregnancy of more than 20 weeks, particularly involving child rape survivors after obtaining the opinion of a permanently constituted medical board. The girl was allegedly repeatedly raped by her maternal uncle, a hotel worker, over the past few months. He has been arrested. Her father is a watchman and mother works as a domestic help.

India's top court rejects plea for termination of 10-year-old rape survivor's pregnancy

India&#39;s top court, the Supreme Court of India, will at 2 pm today deliver the verdict on the appeals against the death penalty filed by four death-row convicts&nbsp;in the December 16 Nirbhaya gang rape case.&nbsp;

A Delhi trial court as well as the Delhi High Court had sentenced all four convicts -- Akshay, Pawan, Vinay Sharma and Mukesh -- to death&nbsp;for the gang rape of a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern in 2012.

The convicts had challenged the death penalty given by the Delhi High Court and trial court in the Supreme Court.

The matter is being heard by the top court bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra and consisting of Justices R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan.&nbsp;

The top court is unlikely to grant relief to the accused.&nbsp;

Justice Dipak Misra, who does not hesitate to give the death sentence, has upheld rape as depravity which is not curable.

On December 16, 2012, six people gang raped a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern in a moving bus. Eleven days after her assault, she was transferred to a hospital in Singapore for treatment but succumbed to her injuries two 
days later.&nbsp;

One of the accused, Ram Singh, hanged himself in prison. The other accused, who was a juvenile at the time of the crime, was convicted in August last year and will serve the maximum sentence of three years in a reform 
home. 
 
Ahead of the verdict, Nirbhaya&#39;s mother said that she has full faith in the judiciary and is sure that the top court will give justice to her daughter.

&quot;We have full faith in the judicial system and I am sure that the Supreme Court will announce death sentence in its verdict for the guilty. I am sure the Supreme Court will give justice to my daughter. This will set an example for the world,&quot; said Nirbhaya&#39;s mother.

Nirbhaya&#39;s father also said that he is sure of the fact that the top court will award death sentence to the convicts.&quot;They will be awarded death sentence. Leave Supreme Court, even God will not forgive such people,&quot; said Nirbhaya&#39;s father. 
 
(WION with inputs from ANI)

On December 16, 2012, six people gang raped a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern in a moving bus. She succumbed to her injuries on December 29

India's top court, the Supreme Court of India, will at 2 pm today deliver the verdict on the appeals against the death penalty filed by four death-row convicts in the December 16 Nirbhaya gang rape case. A Delhi trial court as well as the Delhi High Court had sentenced all four convicts -- Akshay, Pawan, Vinay Sharma and Mukesh -- to death for the gang rape of a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern in 2012. The convicts had challenged the death penalty given by the Delhi High Court and trial court in the Supreme Court. The matter is being heard by the top court bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra and consisting of Justices R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan. The top court is unlikely to grant relief to the accused. Justice Dipak Misra, who does not hesitate to give the death sentence, has upheld rape as depravity which is not curable. On December 16, 2012, six people gang raped a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern in a moving bus. Eleven days after her assault, she was transferred to a hospital in Singapore for treatment but succumbed to her injuries two days later. One of the accused, Ram Singh, hanged himself in prison. The other accused, who was a juvenile at the time of the crime, was convicted in August last year and will serve the maximum sentence of three years in a reform home. Ahead of the verdict, Nirbhaya's mother said that she has full faith in the judiciary and is sure that the top court will give justice to her daughter. "We have full faith in the judicial system and I am sure that the Supreme Court will announce death sentence in its verdict for the guilty. I am sure the Supreme Court will give justice to my daughter. This will set an example for the world," said Nirbhaya's mother. Nirbhaya's father also said that he is sure of the fact that the top court will award death sentence to the convicts."They will be awarded death sentence. Leave Supreme Court, even God will not forgive such people," said Nirbhaya's father. (WION with inputs from ANI)

India: Top court to deliver verdict on death penalty in 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape case today

India&#39;s top court said on Thursday that it will set up a five-judge constitution bench to hear and decide on a batch of petitions relating to the practice of triple talaq, &#39;nikah halala&#39; and polygamy among Muslims.

Triple talaq allows Muslim men instant divorce by saying the word &quot;talaq&quot; three times

The practice of &#39;Nikah Halala&#39; implies that a man cannot remarry a woman after Triple Talaq unless she has already consummated her marriage with another man and her new husband dies or divorces her.

The Centre had submitted a list of issues for adjudication to the top court including the question of whether the fundamental right to practice and propagate one&#39;s religion protected the practice of Triple Talaq, &#39;Nikah Halala&#39; and polygamy among Muslims, PTI reported.

Referring to the legal issues framed by the Centre, the court said all of them related to constitutional issues and needed to be dealt with by a larger bench.

A bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar took on record three sets of issues framed by parties with regard to the cases and said the questions for consideration of the constitution bench would be decided on March 30.

The bench, also comprising Justices NV Ramana and DV Chandrachud, said &quot;the issues are very important. These issues cannot be scuttled&quot;.

The bench also made it clear that it is willing to sit on Saturdays and Sundays to decide on the issue as it was very important.&nbsp;

The BJP-led NDA government has opposed such practices among Muslims on grounds like gender equality, secularism and binding international covenants.

(WION with inputs from PTI)

The top court said all issues referred to it by the central government were constitutional and needed to be dealt by a larger bench

India's top court said on Thursday that it will set up a five-judge constitution bench to hear and decide on a batch of petitions relating to the practice of triple talaq, 'nikah halala' and polygamy among Muslims. Triple talaq allows Muslim men instant divorce by saying the word "talaq" three times The practice of 'Nikah Halala' implies that a man cannot remarry a woman after Triple Talaq unless she has already consummated her marriage with another man and her new husband dies or divorces her. The Centre had submitted a list of issues for adjudication to the top court including the question of whether the fundamental right to practice and propagate one's religion protected the practice of Triple Talaq, 'Nikah Halala' and polygamy among Muslims, PTI reported. Referring to the legal issues framed by the Centre, the court said all of them related to constitutional issues and needed to be dealt with by a larger bench. A bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar took on record three sets of issues framed by parties with regard to the cases and said the questions for consideration of the constitution bench would be decided on March 30. The bench, also comprising Justices NV Ramana and DV Chandrachud, said "the issues are very important. These issues cannot be scuttled". The bench also made it clear that it is willing to sit on Saturdays and Sundays to decide on the issue as it was very important. The BJP-led NDA government has opposed such practices among Muslims on grounds like gender equality, secularism and binding international covenants. (WION with inputs from PTI)

India's top court refers Triple Talaq petitions to Constitution bench

India&#39;s top court, the Supreme Court, refused to restrain high courts across the country from taking up cases relating to demonetisation, delivering yet another setback to the government.

The government had approached the top court for a stay on the proceedings of the high courts proceedings in demonetisation cases on the ground that the situation was &quot;much better,&quot; PTI reported.&nbsp;

This failed to cut any ice with the top court which refused to stay the ongoing proceedings before the high courts on the grounds that people may get &quot;immediate relief&quot; from them.

&quot;We don&#39;t want to stay it,&quot; a bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur said. &quot;There are various issues. People may get immediate relief from the high courts.&quot;

The Centre had claimed that the scheme was a &quot;success&quot; since over Rs six lakh crores had already been deposited and about Rs 10 lakh crore was expected to come to the exchequer till December end.&nbsp;

The government&#39;s top law officer, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, also submitted to the apex court that queues in banks, ATMs, post offices had shortened remarkably and, if required, the time limit of depositing and exchanging the Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 old notes could be extended beyond December 30. He also said people had alternatives by way of digital money.

Rohatgi also told the court that demonetising high denomination currency notes of Rs 1000 and Rs 500 was a &quot;move to remove 70 years of slush money&quot; since they constituted 80 to 85 per cent of the legal tender.&nbsp;

&quot;If it takes another 20-30 days to remove it, I do not think its a big deal,&quot; he told the bench. &quot;It is a success till now.&quot;&nbsp;

&quot;The money will be used in the economy and the lending rates will come down,&quot; the attorney general added.&nbsp;

But the bench was not impressed. It observed that people were seriously affected and doors of courts cannot be shut in a situation which &quot;may lead to riots&quot;.

The setback to the government came in quick succession to the Supreme Court&#39;s November 18 ruling in which it had refused to stop high courts from admitting petitions challenging the government&#39;s notification of November 8 to demonetise the Rs 500 and Rs 1000 notes.&nbsp;

The bench only issued notices and sought the response of those who had approached high courts on the Centre&#39;s plea seeking transfer of the cases to the apex court or any one of the high courts, PTI reported.

Some of the issues which have come up before high courts included removing the weekly limit of Rs 24,000 on withdrawals, challenging the use of old currency notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 at public utility centres like hospitals and petrol pumps and asking for direction to ensure sufficient cash in ATMs.

(WION with inputs from PTI)

The court told the government the doors of the court cannot be shut in a situation where people were seriously affected

India's top court, the Supreme Court, refused to restrain high courts across the country from taking up cases relating to demonetisation, delivering yet another setback to the government. The government had approached the top court for a stay on the proceedings of the high courts proceedings in demonetisation cases on the ground that the situation was "much better," PTI reported. This failed to cut any ice with the top court which refused to stay the ongoing proceedings before the high courts on the grounds that people may get "immediate relief" from them. "We don't want to stay it," a bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur said. "There are various issues. People may get immediate relief from the high courts." The Centre had claimed that the scheme was a "success" since over Rs six lakh crores had already been deposited and about Rs 10 lakh crore was expected to come to the exchequer till December end. The government's top law officer, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, also submitted to the apex court that queues in banks, ATMs, post offices had shortened remarkably and, if required, the time limit of depositing and exchanging the Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 old notes could be extended beyond December 30. He also said people had alternatives by way of digital money. Rohatgi also told the court that demonetising high denomination currency notes of Rs 1000 and Rs 500 was a "move to remove 70 years of slush money" since they constituted 80 to 85 per cent of the legal tender. "If it takes another 20-30 days to remove it, I do not think its a big deal," he told the bench. "It is a success till now." "The money will be used in the economy and the lending rates will come down," the attorney general added. But the bench was not impressed. It observed that people were seriously affected and doors of courts cannot be shut in a situation which "may lead to riots". The setback to the government came in quick succession to the Supreme Court's November 18 ruling in which it had refused to stop high courts from admitting petitions challenging the government's notification of November 8 to demonetise the Rs 500 and Rs 1000 notes. The bench only issued notices and sought the response of those who had approached high courts on the Centre's plea seeking transfer of the cases to the apex court or any one of the high courts, PTI reported. Some of the issues which have come up before high courts included removing the weekly limit of Rs 24,000 on withdrawals, challenging the use of old currency notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 at public utility centres like hospitals and petrol pumps and asking for direction to ensure sufficient cash in ATMs. (WION with inputs from PTI)

India's top court refuses to restrain high courts from taking up demonetisation cases

india-top-court

India Top Court, News on India Top Court, stories on India Top Court, articles on India Top Court, India Top Court stories at Wion, India Top Court news, India Top Court latest news

india top-court