The Supreme Court of India has ruled that the right to menstrual hygiene is an integral part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. This marks a watershed moment in the interstices among gender, health, education and justice. A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan observed that the lack of basic facilities and the stigma around menstruation directly affect girls’ health, education and privacy. The court has directed all states and Union territories to ensure that every school provides biodegradable sanitary napkins free of cost to adolescent girls, is equipped with functional and hygienic gender-segregated toilets, establishes “menstrual hygiene management" corners, prepares gender-responsive curricula that include education on polycystic ovary syndrome — this affects one in five young Indian women — and trains staff in assisting menstruating pupils. Citing Article 15(3) of the Constitution, which provides for special measures for women and children because of their “vulnerability”, the apex court mandated compliance within three months. Such a directive is especially welcome in a nation where menstrual health is subjected to prejudice. This conservatism, coupled with the lack of access to sanitary products and adequate sanitation infrastructure, has serious consequences. It has been estimated that 23 million girls drop out of school annually on account of poor menstruation management facilities.
The Supreme Court’s views need to be seen in a wider context. In recent times, there have been some positive responses from policy when it comes to menstrual health. Menstrual leave is a case in point: Karnataka has become the first Indian state to grant a day of paid menstrual leave each month to women employees in the public and private sector. Hopefully, the apex court’s directive would lead to an improvement in menstrual infrastructure in educational institutions: the momentum needs to be carried into the domestic space too. This is because of the prevailing regressive cultural norms that cloak menstruation in silence, stigmatising a natural biological process and perpetuating misinformation and social isolation of women. This stigma not only normalises exclusion but also undermines girls’ autonomy over their bodies. Even progress has been weaponised: critics of the menstrual leave policy for women argue that such a measure could lead to fewer women being recruited. Addressing these embedded challenges will require more than enlightening judicial directives. It demands sustained public investments in supportive infrastructure and awareness, grassroots education and social engagement.