‘Deep-seated’ bias for male child persists in society: SC

1. At a Glance

• The Supreme Court of India (June 2026) observed that despite improvement in Child Sex Ratio (CSR), "deep-seated patriarchal preferences" for a male child continue to drive sex selection practices. [1]
• The observation arose from enforcement proceedings under the PC&PNDT Act, 1994 — India's primary legislation prohibiting sex selection before and after conception. [2]
• Sex Ratio at Birth (SRB) improved from 819 females/1,000 males (2016–18) to 917 females/1,000 males (2021–23) per SRS Report 2023, yet several States remain below the national average. [3]
• Critical for GS-I (society/gender issues), GS-II (social justice, judiciary), and GS-IV (ethics of gender discrimination).

2. Why in the News

• June 13, 2026: A Supreme Court Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and P.K. Mishra dismissed the appeal of a Maharashtra doctor who challenged criminal proceedings initiated against him under the PC&PNDT Act, 1994. [1]
• The Bench, while dismissing the appeal, made strong obiter dicta observations about the persistence of patriarchal preferences and the continued necessity of strict enforcement of the PC&PNDT Act. [1]
• The court noted that "behind the curtains" prevalence of sex selection continues despite legal prohibitions. [1]

3. Background & Evolution

• 1901: Sex ratio in India stood at 972 females/1,000 males; it deteriorated to 927 by 1991 — driving legislative response. [2]
• 20 September 1994: Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act enacted; came into force in 1996. [2]
• 2000: PIL filed in the Supreme Court flagging lax implementation; the Census 2001 revealed a sharp decline in CSR to 927 (0–6 years). [2]
• 14 February 2003: Act amended and renamed Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PC&PNDT Act) — extending coverage to pre-conception sex selection techniques (e.g., sperm sorting). [2]
• 22 January 2015: Beti Bachao Beti Padhao (BBBP) scheme launched by PM Modi at Panipat, Haryana, specifically targeting low-CSR districts; later expanded to all 640 districts (Census 2011). [4]
• Census 2011: CSR declined further to 914 females/1,000 males (0–6 years) from 927 in 2001. [3]
• NFHS-5 (2019–21): Overall sex ratio (all ages) crossed parity at 1,020 females/1,000 males nationally. [4]

4. Core Static Facts

5. Multi-Dimensional Analysis

Legal / Constitutional

• The PC&PNDT Act, 1994 criminalises: conducting sex-determination tests, advertising sex selection services, and assisting in sex selection; violators face 3 years imprisonment + ₹10,000 fine (first offence). [2]
• The Supreme Court in Voluntary Health Association of Punjab v. Union of India (2013) directed States to strengthen PC&PNDT implementation, appointment of appropriate authorities, and regular audits of ultrasound clinics.
• June 2026 SC observation reinforces that strict enforcement remains essential until "entrenched social attitudes" change — signalling continued judicial oversight. [1]

Social

• Son preference is rooted in patrilineal property inheritance, dowry system, old-age support norms, and religious rites (e.g., antyesti performed by male heirs). [1]
• Several States continue to record SRB below the national average — geographic concentration in north-western States (Haryana, Rajasthan, UP, Punjab historically). [1]
• State-level schemes (e.g., Ladli, Sukanya Samridhi) reflect "sustained efforts" acknowledged by SC but remain insufficient to overcome systemic discrimination. [1]
• NFHS-5 data shows rural sex ratio (1,037) significantly higher than urban (985), suggesting urban affluence + access to technology worsens sex selection. [4]

Economic

• Skewed sex ratios create long-term demographic imbalances — bride scarcity, trafficking, and hypergamy distortions in marriage markets.
• Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana (launched Jan 2015 alongside BBBP) provides financial incentive for girl-child savings; linked to improving perception of girl child's economic value.
• Son preference partly driven by daughters being perceived as an economic liability (dowry, no return on parental investment under patrilineal norms).

Ethical / Governance

• SC's emphasis on "behind the curtains" sex selection highlights the enforcement gap: technology (portable ultrasound, pre-implantation genetic diagnosis) has outpaced regulatory capacity. [1]
• Conflict of interest among medical professionals — income from ultrasound services vs. legal obligation — is a structural governance failure.
• Appropriate Authorities under PC&PNDT are often understaffed and reluctant to prosecute fellow medical professionals (regulatory capture).

Historical

• India's CSR was 972 in 1901 and broadly stable until the 1970s–80s when cheap portable ultrasound technology became accessible, enabling prenatal sex determination. [2]
• The legislative trajectory (1994 Act → 2003 amendment → BBBP 2015) mirrors a shift from prohibition to promotion — from banning sex selection to affirmatively valuing the girl child.

6. Recent Developments (Last 12–18 Months)

• June 13, 2026: SC dismisses Maharashtra doctor's appeal; Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol & P.K. Mishra observes persistence of patriarchal preferences despite improved CSR; stresses strict PC&PNDT enforcement. [1]
• SRS Report 2023: SRB improved from 819 (2016–18) to 917 (2021–23) — an 18-point improvement noted in PIB communications. [3]
• National-Level Sensitization Meeting convened by MoHFW on strengthening PC&PNDT Act implementation — indicating ongoing administrative push for enforcement. [5]
• BBBP at 10 years (2025): PIB releases documenting a decade of BBBP implementation, noting progress in Jharkhand and other States. [4]

7. Prelims Hooks

1. The PC&PNDT Act, 1994 came into force in 1996; amended and renamed on 14 February 2003 to include pre-conception techniques. [2]
2. The 2003 amendment was driven by a PIL filed in 2000 and data from Census 2001 showing CSR at 927. [2]
3. Child Sex Ratio (0–6 years) declined from 927 (2001) to 914 (2011) — the lowest recorded value in India's post-Independence history. [3]
4. Sex Ratio at Birth improved by 18 points — from 819 (2016–18) to 917 (2021–23) per SRS Report 2023. [3]
5. NFHS-5 (2019–21) recorded overall sex ratio at 1,020 females/1,000 males — first time exceeding parity at national level. [4]
6. Beti Bachao Beti Padhao was launched on 22 January 2015 at Panipat, Haryana (a historically low-CSR State). [4]
7. BBBP is a tri-ministerial scheme under MoWCD, MoHFW, and MoE; expanded to all 640 districts of India. [4]
8. The Central Supervisory Board (CSB) is the apex body constituted under the PC&PNDT Act to oversee implementation. [2]
9. Sex ratio in India stood at 972 in 1901 — the decline to 927 by 1991 was the immediate trigger for the 1994 Act. [2]
10. The SC Bench in June 2026 that made the observation comprised Justices Sanjay Karol and P.K. Mishra. [1]
11. Penalty under PC&PNDT Act (first offence): imprisonment up to 3 years and fine up to ₹10,000. [2]
12. The SC characterised ongoing sex selection as evidence of "deep-seated patriarchal preferences" — language directly quotable in Mains answers. [1]

8. Mains Relevance

Plausible Mains question stems:

1. "Despite over three decades of the PC&PNDT Act, sex selection practices continue in India. Critically examine the implementation gaps and suggest reforms for more effective enforcement." (GS-II)
2. "The persistence of son preference in India is rooted in socio-economic structures rather than mere ignorance. Discuss, with reference to recent Supreme Court observations and NFHS-5 data." (GS-I)
3. "'Law is necessary but not sufficient to overcome entrenched patriarchy.' In light of the SC's June 2026 observation on sex selection, evaluate the multi-pronged approach India has adopted for gender-neutral demographics." (GS-IV)

9. Related Topics to Study Next

10. Common Errors / Trap Areas

1. PC&PNDT Act year confusion: The Act was enacted in 1994 but came into force in 1996; the amendment renaming it was in 2003 — candidates often conflate these three dates.
2. CSR vs. SRB vs. Overall Sex Ratio: These are three distinct metrics. CSR = 0–6 years (Census); SRB = at birth (SRS data); Overall = all ages (Census/NFHS). Mixing them in answers is a common error.
3. Implementing ministry: BBBP is tri-ministerial (MoWCD + MoHFW + MoE) — candidates often attribute it solely to MoWCD.
4. 2011 CSR was the historic low (914), not 2001 (927). The trend was worsening between 2001 and 2011 despite the Act — this counterintuitive fact is frequently tested.
5. MTP Act ≠ PC&PNDT Act: Candidates confuse the two. MTP regulates when abortion is legal (a reproductive right); PC&PNDT prohibits sex-selective abortion specifically. They serve different purposes and are often incorrectly swapped in answers.