Open Access Research Article
THE JUSTICE GAP IN CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN IN INDIA: A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF INSTITUTIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE DELIVERY.
Abstract
ABSTRACT
India's
alarming rate of crime against women, despite the successive attempts of the
legislation to curb the crime rate and institutional attempts to fill the void
of justice, highlights the existence of a huge gap in criminal justice. As the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 herald a new dawn in India's criminal law
system, the effectiveness of these laws in enhancing conviction rates and
improving access to justice for survivors of gender-based violence remains a
concern. The justice gap is more than just statistics of disparities in
conviction rates; it also includes disparities in investigation, prosecution,
adjudication, forensic capacity, victim protection, institutional coordination,
and accountability. Judicial delays, evidence issues, secondary victimisation,
socio-cultural factors that hinder victim reporting and the growing
sophistication of technology-facilitated violence against women add to these
gaps. Thus, legislative change is an insufficient measure of effectiveness in
criminal justice, and a better measure is the institutional performance of
agencies that implement the legal rights and provide enforceable remedies. This
study critically analyses the link between conviction rate, accountability of
institutions and criminal justice in crimes against women in India. It states
that conviction rates, if used alone, tell only part of the story and do not
reveal systemic problems in the criminal process. The study thus uses a multidimensional
analytical approach that covers the entire criminal justice chain, from the
filing of complaints and investigative processes to prosecution, judicial
decision-making, victim support, and post-conviction enforcement. Special focus
is placed on identifying institution-related issues that may contribute to case
attrition, delayed justice, lack of evidence, witness hostility, inconsistent
prosecution practices, and a lack of trust in the justice system among
survivors. The paper argues that the
justice gap in India is also a non-legislative issue. The report calls for
improvements to the professionalism and independence of investigators and
prosecutors, forensic infrastructure, judicial capacity, the procedure-centred
protection of survivors, inter-agency coordination, and clear accountability
mechanisms to achieve sustainable improvements in conviction rates. The study
also calls for moving away from conviction-based assessments to a more comprehensive,
institution-performance-based assessment that includes procedural fairness,
timeliness, victim participation, and constitutional rights to access to
justice. The paper, which addresses cutting-edge debates on gender justice,
institutional governance, and accountability in criminal justice in a broad and
multifaceted way, provides an analytical framework for understanding criminal
justice and its effectiveness while incorporating the latest developments in
Indian criminal law.
Published Paper
Author Details
Authors: MS KINKINI CHAKRABORTY & MS GOWTHAMI BN
Registration ID: 1013075 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA13075 & IJLRA13076
Year: Aug-2026 | Volume: 3 | Issue: 5
Approved ISSN: 2582-6433 | Country: Delhi, India
Page No.: 1895-1920
Article Information
THE JUSTICE GAP IN CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN IN INDIA: A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF INSTITUTIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE DELIVERY.
Authors: MS KINKINI CHAKRABORTY, MS GOWTHAMI BN
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Volume 3
- Issue 5
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- AbbreviationIJLRA
- ISSN2582-6433
- AccessOpen Access
- LicenseCC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.