NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has approved a comprehensive handbook aimed at making judicial language and courtroom processes more sensitive, inclusive and accessible in cases involving sexual offences and other vulnerable persons.
The court has directed all High Courts, District Courts, tribunals, police authorities and prosecution agencies to disseminate and implement the handbook, describing it as a “mandatory guiding resource” in such cases.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana approved the publication prepared by an expert committee constituted after the Supreme Court took suo motu cognisance of observations made by the Allahabad High Court in a judgment dated March 17, 2025.
The court said the exercise was not limited to changing terminology in judgments but was intended to promote a judicial approach based on “sensitivity, compassion, and empathy”, particularly when courts deal with minor and vulnerable victims and witnesses.
Supreme Court Takes Note of Allahabad HC Judgment
The proceedings originated after the Supreme Court took note of observations made by a single judge of the Allahabad High Court in its March 17, 2025 judgment in Criminal Revision No. 1449 of 2024.
The issue was brought before the Supreme Court through a letter dated March 20, 2025, from a forum called ‘We the Women of India’. The matter was registered and first heard by the Supreme Court on March 26, 2025.
The court examined both the correctness of the Allahabad High Court’s decision and the propriety of the observations made in it. It ultimately found that the judgment had been affected by an erroneous application of settled principles of criminal jurisprudence.
The Supreme Court allowed the criminal appeals arising from Diary Nos. 15692 and 21813 of 2025 and set aside the High Court’s judgment and order dated March 17, 2025. The matter was remitted to the Special Judge (POCSO), Kasganj, for adjudication in accordance with law.
However, the Supreme Court went beyond correcting the particular judgment and identified a broader concern over how sexual offence cases and other matters involving vulnerable persons are handled across the justice system.
The court observed that judicial decisions in such cases must be guided not only by legal principles but also by sensitivity towards those appearing before the courts.
“Judicial decisions must embody the values of compassion, humanity, and understanding, which are indispensable to the administration of a fair, responsive, and effective system of justice,” the bench said.
Expert Committee Set Up
The Supreme Court said a sensitive approach could not depend solely on individual judges and that sustained institutional measures were necessary to develop a victim-centric approach within the judiciary.
The court requested Justice Aniruddha Bose, former Supreme Court judge and Director of the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal, to constitute and chair an expert committee.
The committee included Justice Sonia G. Gokani, former Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court; Anuradha Shankar, advocate and former Director General of Police, Madhya Pradesh; Dr Surat Singh, advocate, Supreme Court of India; and Prof Lucy T.V. Zehol of the Department of Anthropology at North Eastern Hill University, Shillong.
The committee was assisted by Dr Sonam Jain of the National Judicial Academy and Shrish Kailash Shukul, a district judge of the Madhya Pradesh cadre and then Officer on Special Duty at the Academy.
It was tasked with preparing a comprehensive report titled “Developing Guidelines to Inculcate Sensitivity and Compassion into Judges and Judicial Processes in the Context of Sexual Offences and Other Vulnerable Cases.”
Handbook Takes India’s Diversity Into Account
The Supreme Court said earlier guidelines on gender-neutral and non-stereotypical language had largely been framed around an “anglicised model of court functioning” and did not sufficiently account for India’s linguistic and cultural diversity.
The court noted that judicial proceedings across the country involve regional languages, local idioms, different modes of expression and distinct social contexts.
It said the new guidelines should therefore be capable of meaningful implementation across the country, particularly at the District Judiciary and High Court levels.
The objective, the court clarified, was not merely to replace certain words with prescribed alternatives but to make the justice system easier for ordinary people to understand.
“When our decisions ultimately have the effect of altering the course of a person’s life, it is imperative on us to ensure that such decisions are rendered in terms that are understandable to them,” the bench observed.
The court directed that the handbook use clear and accessible language and avoid unnecessary technical or obscure expressions, including terminology borrowed from foreign languages or jurisdictions.
Focus on Stereotyping and Victim-Blaming
The handbook also addresses stereotyping and victim-blaming and provides guidance on how insensitive questioning during investigation and trial can cause further harm.
The court noted that insensitive cross-examination and police interrogation can inflict “secondary trauma” on victims and may discourage them from pursuing justice.
The publication includes commonly used gendered and stereotypical expressions found in judicial discourse, along with suggested neutral alternatives.
It also addresses terminology used in different regional and linguistic settings and identifies expressions that may carry pejorative or discriminatory meanings.
Guidance on Transgender Persons and SOGIESC
The handbook specifically addresses appropriate language concerning transgender persons and people of diverse sexual orientations, gender identities and expressions, and sex characteristics (SOGIESC).
It provides more respectful and inclusive alternatives where commonly used expressions could undermine dignity or equality.
The court said accurate and dignified terminology was particularly important because language used by courts forms part of the broader constitutional commitment to dignity and equality.
After examining the committee’s report and publication, the Supreme Court described the handbook as a “valuable ready reckoner for judicial officers at every level”, praising its clear presentation, practical orientation and ease of reference.
Handbook to Be Reviewed Periodically
The Supreme Court made clear that the handbook is not intended to be a final or exhaustive statement on appropriate judicial language.
The court said the use of inclusive and sensitive language is an “evolving exercise” as society’s understanding of different issues continues to change.
“The present publication must, therefore, be treated as the commencement of a continuing institutional endeavour rather than its culmination,” the bench observed.
The court said the standards would have to be periodically reviewed and refined to ensure that judicial discourse remains consistent with constitutional values and sensitive to all stakeholders.
Directions for Implementation
The Supreme Court directed its Registry to upload the handbook on the court’s website and circulate copies to all High Courts for publication on their websites and onward dissemination to the District Judiciary.
Copies will also be circulated to tribunals and other quasi-judicial bodies. The National Judicial Academy and State Judicial Academies have been directed to publish the handbook on their respective websites.
The publication is also to be forwarded to Union and State Law Departments, the National Legal Services Authority, State, District and Taluk Legal Services Authorities, and the Ministry of Women and Child Development.
Regional translations are to be circulated to relevant academics, law universities and law colleges.
Importantly, the directions extend to the police and prosecution system. Directors General of Police and Directors of Prosecution in all states have been directed to implement the handbook and instruct police stations to follow its contents while registering FIRs and filing chargesheets.
The court expressly directed that the publication “shall serve as a mandatory guiding resource in matters involving sexual offences and other cases concerning vulnerable persons.”
Authorities have also been directed to organise orientation programmes, training sessions, workshops, seminars and other capacity-building initiatives to ensure that the principles are incorporated into institutional practice.
The Supreme Court disposed of the proceedings after approving the expert committee’s publication and directing its dissemination and implementation across the judiciary, tribunals, police and prosecution system.
