Dignity, Health And Article 21: Locating Menstrual Rights Within The Right To Life

Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India ("SC"), in Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Union of India ("Jaya Thakur"), observed that the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution encompasses the right to menstrual health. The Court emphasized that the absence of effective menstrual hygiene measures in educational institutions not only impairs access to education under Article 21-A but also infringes the rights to equality, dignity, and personal liberty. By recognizing menstrual health as constitutionally significant, the Court situates a menstrual health within the broader framework of fundamental rights.

The decision of the Supreme Court of India reaffirms the opening declaration of the Constitution "We, the People". This declaration reflects that the Constitution and its underlying principles are sustained through participation, inclusion, and equal access to opportunities. Furthermore, Article 14 makes it clear that equality is not confined merely to the recognition of individual dignity; it extends to the assurance of equal opportunity for every individual to realise their human potential and pursue their social, economic, and legal interests.

A study conducted under the Keep Girls in School initiative, reflected in the National Survey and Gap Analysis Report ("Report"), highlights the severity of the issue. The Report notes that 1 (one) out of 5 (five) girls in India drops out of school due to the lack of menstrual education and access to sanitary products. It further observes that 'period education has been missing from schools, families, and communities,' resulting in 71% (seventy one percent) of girls being unaware of menstruation when they first experience it.

What these figures often fail to capture is the cumulative impact. Missing two or three days of school each month translates into several weeks of lost instruction over the course of a year. For students already navigating overcrowded classrooms, limited teacher attention, and household responsibilities, the margin for falling behind is minimal. Over time, these learning gaps widen, participation declines, and disengagement gradually sets in.

It is against this stark reality that Jaya Thakur assumes wide constitutional importance. The Supreme Court observed that the right to equality requires the State to adopt positive and affirmative measures aimed at remedying existing structural disadvantages. It further emphasized that the State has an obligation to take necessary measures to protect individual privacy. When a girl is denied basic menstrual facilities, her autonomy is also compromised. She is compelled to manage her body in a manner dictated by circumstances rather than by choice, thereby undermining her dignity and personal liberty.

The decision in Jaya Thakur marks a significant step in the right direction by the Supreme Court of India. The judgment reinforces the principle of substantive equality. Educational institutions are often regarded as neutral spaces, however, when the menstrual health needs of female students are ignored, such spaces cease to be neutral. Instead, they create an environment that places female students at a structural disadvantage, where hardship becomes a recurring reality rather than an exception. The failure to address menstrual health effectively transforms an institution meant for empowerment into one that perpetuates gendered inequality.

As observed by B. F. Skinner, 'Education is what survives when what has been learned has been forgotten'. These words underscore the enduring impact of education on an individual's life. Education is not merely the transmission of information; it is a process of training and developing the knowledge, skills, and character of students through formal schooling. Therefore, the right to education must not be confined to the idea of free and compulsory schooling alone. It must extend to ensuring quality education delivered in a non-discriminatory environment one that accommodates biological realities and guarantees equal participation for all students.

Ultimately, the recognition of menstrual health under Article 21 reflects the continuing evolution of the Constitution as a living and transformative document. In situating menstrual health within the framework of fundamental rights, the Court has not created a new entitlement, it has clarified what dignity has always required. The true meaning of life under Article 21 lies not merely in survival, but in enabling every individual to participate fully, equally, and without stigma in public life. For countless school-going sgirls from Pooja to Aarti to Shivani, this judgment lays the foundation for transforming everyday struggles into a constitutionally protected right, thereby bringing the promise of life under Article 21 closer to its fullest and most meaningful realization,

The author Manik Tanwar is a lawyer based in New Delhi and Shobha Prasad is a Law student. Views are personal