Back
Book Review: 's 'Courting Equality' Traces India's Struggle for Women's Rights Through Landmark Cases
In a legal landscape where the promise of equality often collides with deep-seated patriarchal norms, 's latest book, Courting Equality: Landmark Cases In The Battle For Women's Rights , arrives as both a historical chronicle and a sharp analysis of the unfinished journey toward gender justice in India. The book, structured in five thematic parts—from the Mathura to the MeToo movement, from family law to workplace rights, and from public participation to freedom from religion—offers legal professionals a nuanced understanding of how law has both enabled and impeded women's autonomy. Sood, a lawyer who served as one of the youngest members of the formed after the Nirbhaya gangrape, brings firsthand insight into the reforms that followed public outrage.
The Unfinished Battle: From Mathura to MeToo
Sood's narrative begins by exploring the tension that feminists have long grappled with: why women continue to believe in the transformative capacity of law despite its deeply patriarchal structure. The early chapters identify critical junctures where law, courts, or society failed women, setting the stage for reforms that did not happen overnight. The Mathura case and the Rameeza Bee rape case are examined as catalysts that ignited public outrage, leading to the . This amendment overhauled , introduced a clearer concept of , and recognized power imbalances in cases involving . Sood draws a direct line from these early struggles to the JS Verma Committee's recommendations, which notably called for the removal of the exception—a recommendation that remains unimplemented to this day.
The book also highlights the role of popular culture as a trigger for legal consciousness. Sood discusses how the film Rang De Basanti became a symbol of youth activism, shaping protests after the Jessica Lal murder trial and the Nirbhaya gangrape. Yet she is careful to note that such cultural moments are merely flashpoints; the real work was done by women's collectives working since the 1980s.
as a Double-Edged Sword
One of the most compelling sections of
Courting Equality
is its treatment of the judgment in
Joseph Shine v. Union of India
(
), which decriminalized
. Sood moves beyond the obvious critique—that
was historically framed as an offence against a husband committed by another man—to explore the judgment's implications for
. She remarks that
"
is a double-edged sword for women because, on one hand, it has been termed as a right of men to be left alone to oppress women (as Catharine MacKinnon calls it)."
The State often invokes
to defend
and
, arguing that courts have no business inside the bedroom. Yet the
in
Joseph Shine
asked the right question:
"Whether the State had any business in punishing
at all."
By locating the
of
in
rather than in the sanctity of marriage, the Court created an opening for women to use
rights in ways that serve their autonomy—protecting
, the right to choose one's faith, and
.
Sood writes:
"Is marriage a public institution which the law ought to protect by punishing
? Or is it a private one, where adulterous relations can be a ground for divorce but not criminality? If a marital home is a private space, free from outside interference, how does that mean women cannot avail legal protection for acts committed within it? To answer this question, it had to find a
demarcating when
can be invoked and when it cannot, and the Court correctly located that line to equality and dignity."
The Ghost of Narasu Appa Mali
Closely linked to the debate are governed by religious dictates. Sood repeatedly invokes the "ghost" of the judgment in , which held that are immune from being tested against . That judgment remains unchallenged to date, and the has performed "interpretative gymnastics" to avoid overruling it even in landmark cases like Shah Bano (), Daniel Latifi (), Shayara Bano (), and the Sabarimala judgment (). In Sabarimala , former Chief Justice DY Chandrachud rejected the argument that the custom of barring menstruating women from the temple fell outside the scope of "" under , holding that customs and significantly impact civil status and cannot remain outside constitutional scrutiny. However, he left the final question for a future bench. Sood asks whether the solution to Narasu Appa Mali is a , but does not offer a definitive answer—leaving the reader to wrestle with the tension between religious freedom and gender equality.
A Reader for Law Schools
The strength of Courting Equality lies in its ability to blend feminist theory, popular culture, and legal development into an accessible yet rigorous narrative. Each chapter is structured like a reader, making it an ideal recommendation for law schools. Sood maintains a neutral tone, allowing the cases to speak for themselves while providing critical context. The book reveals that every period of feminist advancement is followed by a backlash, sometimes led by women or exploited by men. If there is a minor criticism, it is that certain sections feel repetitive or disoriented, but the threads are neatly tied together by the conclusion.
Conclusion
Courting Equality is a timely reminder that the fight for women's rights in India is not a linear progression but a series of hard-won battles, each followed by renewed resistance. For legal professionals, the book offers a comprehensive socio-legal lens through which to understand the interplay of law, society, and gender. As Sood's narrative shows, if the women of the past had not learned to walk, the women of the present would not have learned to run. This book is an essential addition to any legal library, providing both a historical record and a call to action for the unfinished business of gender justice in India.
