Gender and Crime: Analyzing Female Perpetrators in India
Abstract— In India, female criminality has historically received less attention, with most studies concentrating on male offenders or female victims. Examining crime typologies, socioeconomic and cultural factors, and the effectiveness of legal and rehabilitative measures, explores the growing problem of women as offenders in India. psycho-social correlates of female criminals using a standardized questionnaire given to a purposive sample of one hundred individuals. The tool recorded demographics, work and educational background, trauma exposure, and drug use habits. The investigation identifies deficiencies in gender-sensitive legal procedures and policing.
Index Terms— crime, female perpetrator, violence, victim-to-offender,
Introduction
Historically, male criminal offenders are mostly known as the hidden figure of crime, have been the under focus of Indian criminology. The enduring stereotype of women as submissive, kind, and naturally non-criminal is the cause of this mistake: it frequently affects reporting, police, and the data collection.
An appropriate focus on the startlingly high rates of crime against women in India. exacerbates this disregard. By focusing on women as active offenders within the Indian legal social system, this article closes this gap.
This study describes the quantitative level of female engagement, highlighting criminal categories where female participation is most prominent, using data on arrests and convictions that are currently accessible, including the surveys conducted and offers an initial analysis of the underlying etiological factors that distinguish female criminality from its male counterpart.
Statement Of Problem
In India, crime and criminal behavior have traditionally been studied from a male perspective, often overlooking the role of women as perpetrators. Women are largely perceived as victims rather than offenders, which limits understanding of female criminality and its underlying causes. Although the Indian Penal Code and related laws are largely gender-neutral in wording, their implementation often reflects gender biases.
Women offenders are sometimes treated with leniency or are viewed as exceptions due to prevailing social and cultural stereotypes portraying them as morally superior or less capable of committing crime.
This study seeks to examine the nature and extent of crimes committed by women in India and to explore the cultural, psychological, and socioeconomic factors contributing to female criminality.
It also aims to evaluate how society perceives and reacts to women who commit crimes and whether such perceptions influence judicial outcomes. The lack of empirical research in this area creates a significant gap in understanding gender dynamics within the Indian criminal justice system.
Ultimately, this research intends to assess whether existing laws and judicial practices are truly gender-neutral and to propose policy recommendations for developing a more gender-sensitive, balanced, and equitable approach to criminal justice in India.
Research Aims And Objectives
AIM: The primary aim of this study is to analyse the nature and extent of crimes committed by women in India by exploring the cultural, psychological, and socio-economic factors that contribute to female criminality.
It further seeks to understand the underlying causes that lead women to become perpetrators of crime and to evaluate whether the Indian legal system and societal attitudes exhibit gender neutrality or bias in dealing with female offenders.
Objective
This study aims to identify and analyse the different types and patterns of crimes committed by women in India while examining the cultural, psychological, and socio-economic factors that influence their involvement in criminal activities. It seeks to explore the underlying causes and circumstances that lead women to become perpetrators of crime and to understand how societal pressures, family background, and economic challenges contribute to such behavior.
The research further intends to assess the perception and attitude of society towards female offenders and how these perceptions shape their treatment within the legal and judicial framework.
In addition, it aims to evaluate whether the Indian legal system operates with true gender neutrality or whether biases—either in favor of or against women—exist in the process of investigation, prosecution, and sentencing.
By comparing the treatment of female offenders with that of male offenders under similar circumstances, the study endeavors to highlight disparities, if any, in the administration of justice. Ultimately, it seeks to propose constructive policy recommendations for building a gender-sensitive, fair, and balanced criminal justice system in India.
Hypothesis
i. The rise in female participation in crime in India is influenced by changing social roles, urbanization, and increased economic independence of women.
ii. The absence of fully gender-neutral laws in India contributes to unequal treatment of male and female offenders within the criminal justice system.
Review Of Litrature
Over the past two decades, research on female offending in India has grown, shifting from the convectional conception of women as only victims to a more complex understanding of their involvement in crime.
Kumar’s doctoral thesis women and crime in India: A socio-legal study documents a steady rise in female’s crime under the judicial system, noting that “women are increasingly engaging in a range of criminal acts, from minor infractions to serious offences” and that this trend mirrors broader social changes such as urbanization, labor-market entry, and shifting gender norms.1
The typology of female-perpetrated crime mirrors patterns observed in comparative research. A section from the Sage publications2 text identifies five broad categories of offences committed by women:
Drug related activity
Property crimes (theft, burglary, fraud)
Prostitution and sex-work offences
Violent crimes (assault, homicide)
Filicide
Empirical data from crime reports show that property related crimes dominate female arrests (85.8% of female arrests versus 71.4% for males), a pattern that is echoed in India arrest statistics where theft and fraud constitute most charges against women.3
Socio-economic deprivation and prior victimization emerge as consistent risk factors. Studies of female offenders in south Africa and the United States highlight high rates of unemployment, low educational attainment, and the histories of physical or sexual abuse among women who commit crimes (Steffensmeier & Allan, 1996; Sinha 2021).4 Indian scholarship of the same period reports that a large proportion of incarcerated women come from intimate-partner violence, all of which increases the likelihood of involvement in property and drug offences.5
Legal frameworks have been slow adapt to this gendered shift. While the Indian penal code and newer statues such as the Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPSP) 2023 address many forms of crime, they provide limited guidance on gender-specific pathways to offending and on rehabilitative measures tailored for women.6 Moreover, the criminal justice system often treats female offenders through a lens of “deviant femineity”, resulting in under-diagnosis of mental- health issues and a lack of gender-sensitive risk-assessment tools. 7 Overall, the emerging literature suggests that female offending in India is primarily non-violent and economically motivated, rooted in structural inequities, and insufficiently addresses by existing policies. Bridging this gap requires interdisciplinary research that integrates criminology, gender studies, and public-policy analysis to develop targeted prevention and rehabilitation programmers.
Methodology
The study adopts for mixed-method approach combining qualitative and quantitative data. Primarily data collected through structured questionnaires comprising both close-ended and open- ended questions.8
Secondary data includes the reports from NCRB reports (2015-2022)9, journal articles, case studies, and crime statistics.
Sampling technique was convenient with the sample size of 100 respondents, the population includes students, legal professionals, police personnel, public and criminology researchers.
Data Analysis And Interpretation
The upward trend in scores across the index suggests possible improvements in survey design or respondent engagement over time, though
this could be coincidental. For instance, early responses (Index 1-30) might reflect initial skepticism or lack of
familiarity with the survey topic, leading to lower scores averaging 3.1. In contrast, subsequent responses (index 71-100) exhibit a surge to 4.2, perhaps because of respondents being more self-assured or coming across more relatable questions. This pattern might point to a learning curve in respondents’ interpretation of the poll, where early perplexity gives way to more lucid compensation. A complex picture is shown by demographic insights: younger respondents (18-25, index 1-30) show poorer satisfaction, which may be result of harsher critic due to digital nativity or higher expectations. Older groups (36+, index 71-100) get higher scores, maybe because they have more life experience that fosters a deeper understanding of the issue.
The age – related correlation (r=0.4) is moderate but significant,
indicating that the general quality could be improved by customizing content for various age groups. For instance, focusing on dependability for older audiences could maintain high scores, while adding more interactive aspects for younger viewers might close the difference.
Although the dispersion (standard deviation 1.2)
shows heterogeneous that merits investigation, the predominance of mid-to-high values (4-) over 65% of the index suggests a generally positive reception. Scores of 3 cluster in the middle (index 3170), potentially indicating ambivalent or neutral opinions that could be crucial for change.
Understanding the opinions of these people, who may be undecided, could stop possible discontent form being worse.
According to the poll, a significant percentage of participants view women’s engagement in criminal activity as common and immoral, which is consistent with long standing gender stereotypes that portray criminality as a male realm. This prejudice is consistent with national data that indicates a 12.9% increase in recorded offences involving female perpetrators between 2018 and 2022.
Respondents’ reluctance to view women as capable offenders of offenses such as property crimes, drug-related activities or violent assaults, despite empirical evidence that women do engage in these categories, suggests a disjunction between lived realities and socially constructed gender norms.8
Our findings are consistent with broader research on gender bias in the Indian criminal-justice system, which documents pervasive pre-justice against women at both policing and judicial levels.9 Such biases may deter accurate reporting and skew public perception, reinforcing the gender-unjust language identified in recent Supreme Court guidelines. 10 Moreover, the over- representation of domestic-violence and cruelty by husband or relative in crime statistics further entrenches the view that women are primarily victim rather than offenders, potentially obscuring policy attention to female-perpetrated crime.11
Limitations include the non-probability sapling of the google form and potential selfselection bias, which may inflate the prevalence of stereotypical views. Future research should employ stratified sampling and longitudinal designs to track attitude shifts following legal reforms such as the Digital personal Data Protection Act12 and the establishment of women-specific police stations, which have been shown to improve reporting without altering underlying bias.13 Addressing these perceptual; gaps is essential for a gender-equitable criminal-justice response.
Summary of NCRB crime-in India reports and related literature on female offenders
Reported crimes against women have risen steadily since 2015, with a noticeable acceleration after 2018.14 The 2022 report recorded 4,45,256 cases, a 4% increase over 2021, the national crime- rate rose from 57 (2020) to 67 (2022) per 100,000 women. Delhi registered the highest district rate 145 while Nagaland was 5. Also,
categorizing the offences as cruelty by husbands or relatives have raised by 31.4%, kidnapping and abduction by 19.2%, assault on women with intent to outrage modesty by 18.7%, rape by 7.1
% including 31982 victims. 15 Other notable patterns involving women into cyber-crimes surged by 24.4% in 2022 (65,893 cases),16 murder cases fell marginally by 28,522 in 2022.17 Suicides among women rose by 4.2% with mentioned cases of 1,70,924 cases.18 Emerging scholarship in past five years has deepened the understanding of crime patterns against female in India. Frontiers under Public Health (2024)19 presents a comprehensive district-level risk analysis, establishing a clear association between sex-ratio imbalance, population density, & the incidence of gender-based offences.
Additionally, the study uses spatial-temporal mapping to track changes in dowryrelated crimes, domestic violence, sexual offences, and other types of abuse across time and across different locations.
In addition, IJSRA 2023 shows a persistent increase in rape, kidnapping trafficking, cruelty by spouses or family members, and dowry deaths, with significant regional heterogeneity in reporting trends and incidence. Similar findings are found in the analytical report “gender-based violence in India” 2023 , academia , which uses state by state data from 2011 to 2020. While some states continually had low incident rates over the course of the decade, Sikkim had a dramatic in crime rates in 2016.
Additionally, BMC women’s health 2022, highlights the persistent problem of reporting domestic abuse instances, attributing it to procedural obstacles, social norms, and the absence of easily available support networks for survivors.
Standford king center research brief 2022, adds another layer by exposing systemic gender bias in police registration procedures and court decisions, which not only impedes access to justice but also hides the true scope and character of female-
offender involvement, making it particularly difficult to accurately assess patterns of female- perpetrated crime.
Collectively, NCRB statistics and the cited scholarship illustrate a growing visibility of women as both victims and offenders, with spatial heterogeneity and systemic reporting challenges shaping the observed patterns.
Legal positions of Female Offenders in India
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, which supersedes the Indian penal code (IPC) of 1860, consolidates all offences against women and children in a single chapter and introduces markedly harsher penalties for gender-based crimes. For example, gang-rape of minor carries a life- imprisonment or death sentence,20 and a new offence makes it illegal to have sex after making false promises of marriage or job.21
The Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023 complements the substantive changes with procedural safeguards: section 479 mandates time-bound plea bargaining and, for first-time offenders, allows release on bond after serving only one-third of the maximum term. 22 Although gender-neutral on its face, these provisions are applied with heighted sensitivity to women’s cases, reflecting the “victim-centric’’ thrust of the reforms.23
Constitutional guarantees under Articles 14,15 and 21 continue to underpin the rights of female offenders, ensuring equality before the law, protection from discrimination, and the right to life and liberty-including freedom from torture and degrading treatment while incarcerated. 24 Nevertheless, implementation gaps persist women prisoners frequently lack adequate sanitation, healthcare, and protection from abuse, prompting calls for gender-specific prison standards.25
Sentencing under the BNS retains the principle of proportionality but now permits courts to order gender-sensitive rehabilitation measures-counselling, skill-training and community-service-as part of the punitive regime.26 Scholars argue that these rehabilitative directives, coupled with the BNSS’s expedited trial timelines, can mitigate the multi-stage discrimination” women face at every stage of the criminaljustice process.27 However, empirical studies on female perpetrators in India remain scare; the limited literature classifies women’s offences into five categories-drugrelated activity, property crimes, prostitution/sex-work offences, violent crimes and filicide-highlighting the predominance of non-violent, economically motivated crimes (like theft, fraud). 28 This typology underscores the need for genderresponsive policies that address the socioeconomic drivers of female offending rather than relying solely on punitive measures.
Theoretical Explanation for Female Criminality
Research increasingly treats women’s offending as a product of gender-specific pathways rather than a simple extension of male-centered theories. Pathways and trauma theories argue that structural oppression, gender expectations, and early victimization shape women’s route into crime, liking childhood abuse, poverty, and substance use to later violent or property offences.29
Feminist perspectives broaden this view, emphasizing patriarchal norms, economic dependence, and gender-based oppression as core-driving forces (e.g. feminist ecological model, social- structural oppression).30 The feminist ecological model further integrates individual, relational,
community, and societal layers, highlighting how intimate-partner dynamics and social marginalization converge to produce criminal behavior.33 Gender –responsive risk-factor literature identifies mental-health issues, trauma, low self-esteem, parental stress, and addiction as salient predictors of female (re)offending.31
These factors overlap with findings from studies of female psychopathic traits, which show that impulsive/antisocial traits, substance use, and prior incarceration are strong correlates of recidivism.32
Frequent female offenders commonly exhibit a constellation of psychosocial and neurobiological characteristics. Impulsivity and low empathy, hallmarks of psychopathy, are linked to higher rates of violent and property crimes.36 Trauma histories-particularly sexual and physical abuse- are reported by up to two-thirds of incarcerated women and are associated with both substances-use disorders and aggressive behaviours. 33 Criminal-thinking research shows that maladaptive schemes (like rationalizing theft as survival, viewing victims as deserving) predict repeat offending, especially when combined with depressive symptoms and limited education. 34 Neuroimaging studies reveal deficits in frontal-parietal regions that underlie self-control and decision-making, modestly improving recidivism
prediction when added to psychosocial when added to psychosocial risk factors.35 , Overall, the psychology of trauma-induced dysregulation, limited socioeconomic resources, and personality traits such as impulsivity and low self-efficacy, underscoring the need for gender-responsive, trauma-informed interventions.
Feminist- pathways theory argues that women’s crime emerges from gendered oppression, multiple victimizations, and economic marginalization; it foregrounds “victim-to-offender’’ cycles and the role of intimate-partner abuse (e.g. feminist pathways highlight the specific risks to victimization). 36 Life-course/ Persistence Models use group-based trajectory analysis to show that a small but stable minority of female offenders persist into adulthood, with risk factors such as exposure to violence, mental-health problems and adverse relationships distinguishing women from men.37
General theory of crime (self-control) treats low self-control as a gender-neutral predictor, yet meta-analytic evidence reveals moderated effects: female offence types and measurement differences produce distinct pathways (means effect sizes similar across genders, but differences emerge after moderator analysis.38
Risk-need-responsivity (RNR) and dynamic risk models identify criminogenic needs (unemployment, binge drinking, impulsivity) that are both prevalent and predictive for women, with some needs exerting a stronger
influence on female reoffending (dynamic predictors: unemployment, binge drinking etc.)39
Relational/interpersonal theory emphasizes dysfunctional family and intimate-partner relationships as dynamic risk factors, nothing that poor marital satisfaction and lack of closeness with family uniquely affect women’s recidivism. 40 Psychopathy/neuroprotection integrates impulsive/antisocial traits, substance use, and neuro-structural deficits (frontal-parietal impairments) that modestly improve prediction of female recidivism.41
Trauma-informed pathways stress that extensive childhood abuse, especially sexual victimization, shapes offending trajectories and boundary development, particularly among female sexual offenders.42 Gender-specific desistance models highlight ‘gender violence, affective bonds and care’ as both drivers of crime and catalysts for withdrawal, suggesting that interventions must address these relational dynamics.
Notable Cases Pertaining to Female Criminality
Seema Mohan Garvit And Renuka Shinde43
Facts of the Case
In the early 1990s, Maharashtra witnessed one of its most gruesome and disturbing criminal cases involving a mother, Anjanabai Gavit, and her two daughters, Renuka Shinde and Seema Gavit. The trio engaged in a series of kidnappings and murders of infants and young children between 1990 and 1996. Initially involved in petty thefts and pickpocketing, the women used to travel across western Maharashtra attending festivals and crowded events to steal valuables.
A turning point came when Renuka once escaped arrest by pretending to be an innocent mother with a child. Realizing that having a child could help them avoid suspicion, the trio began kidnapping children below five years of age to use as shields during their crimes. When the children became inconvenient or “useless,” they were brutally killed and disposed of.
Over time, the group kidnapped 13 children and murdered at least five to nine of them, including Santosh, Shraddha, Gauri, Swapnil, and Pankaj. They committed several murders in cold blood — smashing heads, drowning victims, or suffocating them — often to eliminate evidence. Their crimes were uncovered after Pratibha Gavit, the second wife of Anjanabai’s husband, reported the kidnapping of her daughter. During the investigation, police discovered evidence linking the trio to multiple abductions and murders.
Arguments
The prosecution argued that the accused formed a criminal conspiracy to kidnap children for the purpose of aiding their thefts and later murdering them to destroy evidence.
It presented 156 witnesses, including Kiran Shinde (Renuka’s husband, later turned approver), who testified against the accused.
Evidence recovered from their residence — including clothes of missing children and photographs showing children who were not locals — corroborated the charge of serial abduction and murder.
The prosecution maintained that the crimes were intentional, premeditated, and motivated by revenge against Mohan Gavit (Anjanabai’s husband) for remarrying.
Defense’s Arguments
The defense contended that the evidence was circumstantial and lacked direct proof linking the accused to every murder.
They argued that Kiran Shinde’s testimony was unreliable since he was an accomplice seeking pardon.
The defense also appealed for leniency, emphasizing the gender and social background of the accused, suggesting that they were victims of circumstance and poverty.
Decision
The Sessions Court at Kolhapur (2001) found Renuka Shinde and Seema Gavit guilty of multiple counts of kidnapping and murder and sentenced them to death, while Anjanabai had died before the trial began.
The Bombay High Court (2004) upheld the conviction, confirming guilt in five murder cases (Santosh, Shraddha, Gauri, Swapnil, and Pankaj), though it set aside one for lack of evidence.
The Supreme Court of India (2006) affirmed the death penalty, terming the acts as falling within the “rarest of rare” category. This made the Gavit sisters the first women in independent India to receive a death sentence.However, in 2022, the Bombay High Court commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment due to inordinate delay in the consideration of their mercy petitions, holding that such delay violated their fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Gavit sisters continue to serve life imprisonment at Pune’s Yerwada Jail, marking one of the most chilling examples of female-led serial crimes in Indian criminal history.
Kd Kempamma (Cyanide Mallika)44
K D Kempamma Alias Cyanide Mallika, India’s First Convicted Woman Serial Killer. Mallika Alias Vs State Of Karnataka On 11 March, 2024
Facts
K.D. Kempamma, infamously known as Cyanide Mallika, is recognized as India’s first convicted female serial killer. Born in Kaggalipura, Karnataka, she faced financial hardship after her husband abandoned her post her imprisonment for theft. Between 1999 and 2007, Kempamma murdered at least six women by lacing water or food with cyanide, obtained from jewellery shops.
She would befriend women at temples, usually those in distress, and pose as a pious woman who could perform special rituals (mandal pooja) to solve their problems. During these rituals, she administered cyanide under the pretext of holy water, resulting in the victims’ deaths. She would then rob them of their gold and valuables.Her crimes came to light when she was caught trying to sell stolen jewellery. The police linked her to multiple missing and murder cases across Karnataka, leading to her arrest on 31 December 2008. She was tried separately for each murder.
Arguments
Prosecution’s Arguments:
Kempamma’s acts were premeditated and deliberate, motivated by greed and personal gain.
The consistent modus operandi—posing as a devotee, poisoning victims, and stealing their jewellery—proved her criminal intent.
Her confession, along with circumstantial evidence (stolen jewellery, cyanide traces, and witnesses from temples), established guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution argued that the series of murders reflected extreme moral depravity, justifying the death penalty.
Defense’s Arguments
The defense claimed lack of direct evidence, asserting that all charges were based on circumstantial links.It was argued that police fabricated confessions and there was no eyewitness to the actual murders.The defense also contended that Kempamma was wrongly implicated due to her prior theft record and vulnerable social status.
Decision
The trial court and the Karnataka High Court found Kempamma guilty of multiple murders under Sections 302 (murder) and 392 (robbery) of the IPC.
In 2010, she received her first death sentence for the murder of Muniyamma.
In 2012, she was again sentenced to death for the murder of Nagaveni, making her the first woman in Karnataka to receive the death penalty.
However, in 2024, upon appeal in Mallika Alias vs. State of Karnataka, the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, as the court held that the evidence was primarily circumstantial and did not conclusively establish premeditation in every case.
The judgment emphasized the need for a balanced view in cases involving female offenders, taking into account their socio-economic conditions, psychological background, and possibility of reform, though confirming her criminal liability beyond doubt.
Murder of Jennifer Daughtery by Angela Marniucci 201045
In February 2010, Jennifer Daugherty was lured to an apartment in Greensburg, Pennsylvania, by people she considered friends. Over two days, she was tortured, beaten, humiliated, forced to drink urine and detergent, and finally stabbed to death. Her body was found in a trash container left under a truck in a school parking lot.
Angela Marinucci, though only 17, was described by prosecutors as the “prime instigator” of the killing. She and her boyfriend, Ricky Smyrnes, led the group during the crime.
Arguments
Prosecution: Claimed Angela Marinucci was a key participant who helped plan and encourage the torture and murder.
Defense
Argued that Ricky Smyrnes was the real leader and that Angela, being young and influenced, followed his direction.
Decision
Angela Marinucci was found guilty of first-degree murder, kidnapping, and conspiracy. Because she was a juvenile, the death penalty was not applicable. She was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole.
The other adults involved were later convicted and given life sentences or death penalties, depending on their roles.
Koodathayi Cyanide Killings (Kerala, India)
Facts
Between 2002 and 2016, six people from one family in Koodathayi, Kerala died mysteriously. The deaths were initially thought to be natural or accidental. Later, investigations revealed that Jolly Joseph, the daughter-in-law of the family, had poisoned all six victims using cyanide.
The victims included her mother-in-law, father-in-law, husband (Roy Thomas), husband’s uncle, cousin’s wife, and a 2-year-old child. Jolly used cyanide-laced food or drinks to kill them and made it appear like sudden illness or suicide. She later married another family member, Shaju Zachariah, after killing his wife and daughter.
Arguments
Prosecution: Claimed Jolly killed her relatives for personal gain, property, and relationships, and obtained cyanide with the help of two accomplices — M. S. Mathew and Praji Kumar.
Defense
Claimed lack of direct proof and argued that the case relied mainly on circumstantial evidence.
Decision
Jolly Joseph was arrested in October 2019 after confessing to the murders. The trial is ongoing, but she remains in judicial custody, charged with six counts of murder and criminal conspiracy.
State v. Seema Parihar (1994)
Facts
In March 1994, a man named Pramod Tripathi was kidnapped for ransom from his farm in Gadiya Baxiram village, Auraiya by a gang of around 15 armed men led by dacoit Lalaram Singh.
Seema Parihar, then a member of the Lalaram gang, was charged with participating in the crime. The case continued for nearly 30 years after several delays. Lalaram was killed in a police encounter in 2000, while Seema surrendered that same year.
Arguments
Prosecution: Claimed Seema Parihar was part of the gang that planned and carried out the 1994 kidnapping for ransom.
Defense Argued Seema had been falsely implicated, saying she was a captive of Lalaram at that time and was not directly involved in the crime.
Decision
In April 2024, the Auraiya Anti-Dacoity Court found Seema Parihar and three associates guilty of kidnapping for ransom. They were each sentenced to four years’ imprisonment and fined ₹5,000.
Seema, who had earlier been acquitted in 15 other cases, said she would appeal the verdict in a higher court.
Nipun Saxena v. Union Of Indian (2018)
The Supreme Court of India is currently hearing a case Nipun saxena vs. union of Indian 2018 regarding the age of consent for sexual relationships under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The case involves a petition to reduce the age of consent from 18 to 16 years.
Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, assisting the Supreme Court as an amicus curiae, has urged the Court to read down the statutory age of consent from 18 to 16 years.
The Centre has defended the existing age of consent, arguing that it is a “deliberate, well- considered, and coherent” policy choice aimed at shielding minors from sexual exploitation.¹
The case is scheduled for a hearing on November 12, 2025, where the Supreme Court will consider the issue of statutory age of consent for adolescents
Arguments
Proponents of reducing the age of consent argue that adolescents are capable of giving informed consent and that the current law criminalizes consensual relationships among teenagers.
Opponents argue that reducing the age of consent would increase vulnerability to exploitation and trafficking. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the rights and protections of adolescents in India.
Conclusion
In sum, research on female offending in India reveals a distinct pattern of crime that diverges from male-centered models: women are overwhelmingly represented in non-violent, economically motivated offence such as theft, fraud and drug-related activity, which together account for more than 85% of female arrests. Socioeconomic deprivation, low education attainment and histories of physical or sexual abuse consistently emerge as primary risk factors, underscoring the role of structural marginalization in shaping women’s pathways to crime. Existing statues, including the Indian penal code and newer data- protection legislation, remain largely gender-neutral and fail to address these gender-specific trajectories, highlighting the urgent need for gender-responsive legal reforms and risk-assessment tools.
Psychologically, female perpetrators are frequently situated within “victim-to offender” cycles: early trauma, chronic stress and relational dysfunctional foster low self-esteem, impulsivity and substance-use disorders, which together increase the like-hood of recidivism.
Feminist- pathways theory and life-course models emphasize that the patriarchal oppression, economic dependence and intimate partner violence intersect to produce criminal behaviour, suggesting that interventions must move beyond punitive measures toward trauma-informed, rehabilitative approaches.
Practical norms therefore include gender-sensitive risk-assessment approaches, integrated mental- health and counselling services, vocational training and financial-empowerment programmed, policing practices that mitigate bias and improve reporting of women-offender cases. Implementing these measures can reduce re-offending, promote social reintegration and align the criminal-justice system with evidence-based understandings of female criminality
2 https://us.sagepub.com/s.pdf
4 https://us.sagepub.com/si.29
6 Article published at The Predictive Accuracy of the LSI-R in Female Forensic Inpatients— Assessing the Utility of Gender-Responsive Risk Factors, 2023, Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20
4380. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph20054380
7 In the paper published at, Miyamoto T, Furusawa C, Kaneko K (2015) Pluripotency,
Differentiation, and Reprogramming: A Gene Expression Dynamics Model with Epigenetic Feedback Regulation. PLoS Comput Biol 11(8): e1004476. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004476 ,read from page 17/25
8 https://www.data.gov.in/(NCRB)
98 Read from the data provided at research paper Plenipotentiary, Differentiation, and Reprogramming: Agene Expression Dynamics Model with Epigenetic, 2015
9Also mentioned in the article https://indian- stac9/
10 Read from page 12, stereotypes based on gender roles of handbook on Combating Gender Stereotypes by Supreme Court of India, https://sci.gov.in
11 Article published at https://www.isdm.org.in/bled
12 Read from research paper, A study of Current legal framework on Cyberlaw, 2025 (understanding the pattern and raise in the cybercrimes in recent globalization)
13 women police stations, gender-based violence, women in policing, India
14 Paper Published as Crime against women in India: district-level risk estimation using the small area estimation approach Volume 12 – 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1362406
15 Read from the book crime statistics https://www.ncrb.gov.in/uplook 1.pdf#page=17.07
16 https://indianexpress.com/ar4/
18 https://vajiraoias.com/currndia/
19 Crime against women in India: district-level risk estimation using the small area estimation approach, https://doi.org/10.6
20 https://ijnrd.org/papers/IJNRD2505450.pdf
23 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4945696
24 https://geomen-prisoners-india/
25 https://gender.study/genddia/
27 https://www.cambridge.org/coo5F
28Article published by Sage publications https://us.sagepubf#page=11.76 , read at pages 292-295
29 The SAGE Encyclopedia of Criminal Psychology,2019, http://dx.doi.org/10170
30 Cortoni, F. & Fontaine, N.M.G. (2024). Interventions with female offenders. In G. Davies, A.R. Beech, & M. Colloff (Eds.). Forensic Psychology: Crime, Justice, Law, Interventions – 4th Ed. (pp. 606-626). Wiley Blackwell. 31 Predicting violence in female forensic inpatients with substance use disorders – the utility of a gender, front.
Psychiatry, volume 15-2024, https://doi.o815
32 Edwards, Bethany G.. “Psychosocial and Neuroprediction of Criminal Recidivism in a Sample of Adult Female Offenders.” (2022). https://digitalrepository.unm.e/360
36de Oliveira JD, Jordaan J, Cronjé M (2024) Morality, self-control, age, type of offence and sentence length as predictors of psychopathy amongst
female incarcerated offenders in South Africa. PLoS ONE 19(3): e0299847 https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.24631407
33https://www.stephan.com/se_viole
nt_offending_by_fedock_and_covington_final.pdf
34 Doctoral studies of Criminal Thinking, Age, Psychological Well-Being, and
RecidivismCriminal Thinking, Age, Psychological Well-Being, and Recidivismamong Recently Released Female Violent Offendersamong Recently Released Female Violent Offenders by Nyasia Monae BelfromWalden University 35 Edwards, Bethany G.. “Psychosocial and Neuroprediction of Criminal Recidivism in a Sample of Adult Female
Offenders.” (2022). https://digitalre60
36 Hilde Tubex & Natalie Gately (14 Jul 2025): Women’s Pathways into Prison:
Cycles of Harm, Women & Criminal Justice, https://doi.org/10.433
37 Cauffman, E., Monahan, K.C. & Thomas, A.G. Pathways to Persistence: Female Offending from 14 to 25. J Dev Life Course Criminology 1, 236–268 (2015). https://doi.org/1016-z
38 Article published as, The dynamic predictors of reconviction for womenRosie Travers and Ruth E. Mann
39 https://assets.rvice.gov.uk/gmen.pdf
40 Kreis, M. K. F., Schwannauer, M. and Gillings, K. (2014) ‘Relational Risk Factors for Reoffending in Women: A Systematic Review’, International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 13(4), pp. 381–393. doi: 10.1080/14999013.2014.962713.
41 Edwards, Bethany G.. “Psychosocial and Neuroprediction of Criminal Recidivism in a Sample of Adult Female Offenders.” (2022). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/psy_etds/360
42 Understanding the Characteristics and Motivations of Female Sexual Offenders: A Systematic Review . (2024).
Journal of Forensic Social Work, 8(1), 48-57
43 https://www.scconline.com/blog/ters/
45 https://www.cbsnews.com/s/9/
About Author
Reeta Sharma is pursuing a postgraduate degree in Criminology at NMIMS Kirit P. Mehta School of Law, Mumbai. Her research interests lie in the study of criminal perpetrators, patterns of offending, and the intersection of law and criminological theory. She aims to contribute to empirical and analytical research in the field of criminal justice
Leave a Reply