Menstrual health, now a fundamental right: ‘It's gender-inclusive constitutional justice’

The landmark judgement by the Supreme Court is likely to be remembered not only for the public consensus it has generated but for the legal clarity with which it expands the meaning of life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. By recognising access to menstrual health as a fundamental right, the court has acknowledged a long-ignored reality: that millions of adolescent girls in India navigate puberty without adequate education, equity, health or dignity.

In a departure from past approaches, the Bench led by Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan reframed menstrual health and hygiene not as a matter of welfare or budgetary discretion, but as an enforceable constitutional entitlement. The judgement affirms that prioritising girls’ menstrual health is not a policy preference, but a requirement of gender-inclusive constitutional justice.

The judgement places schools at the centre of this rights-based intervention, not merely as educational spaces but as institutions where constitutional guarantees must be realised in daily practice. By directing all states and Union territories to comply across both government and private schools, the court has underscored that menstrual dignity cannot be contingent on institutional ownership or management models. Under the ruling, schools must now provide free oxo-biodegradable sanitary products to girls in classes 6 to 12; ensure access to functional girls’ toilets with covered disposal bins, soap and clean water; and establish menstrual hygiene management corners stocked with emergency supplies, extra uniforms and underwear. The emphasis on disability-friendly infrastructure is notable, as it recognises that menstrual health provisions must be inclusive by design.

At the heart of these directions lies a simple yet powerful intent: No girl should be forced to miss school because of menstruation. By foregrounding everyday vulnerabilities — lack of products, unusable toilets, fear of embarrassment — the apex court draws attention to the routine, often invisible, neglect that undermines girls’ education, health, dignity and self-esteem.

The judgement is firmly anchored in the principle of substantive equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. When schools fail to enable safe menstrual practices, girls are not merely inconvenienced, they are denied equal access to education and health. By treating menstruation not as a private inconvenience but as a constitutional concern, the judgement aligns sanitation, health and dignity with the Right to Education under Article 21A. By doing so, it addresses a long-standing, multidimensional challenge that contributes to school dropouts, marginalisation and gender-based discrimination. The judgement also gives constitutional weight to what policy discourse has long described as “period poverty”, now recognised as a structural barrier to educational continuity.

The apex court also confronts the social stigma surrounding menstruation. By directing the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) and State Councils of Educational Research and Training (SCERT) to integrate gender-responsive curricula, and mandating the sensitisation of male teachers and students, the judgement shifts responsibility away from girls alone and onto institutions.

For decades, menstruation has been cloaked in shame, forcing girls to navigate both biological change and social exclusion on their own. The verdict seeks to replace shame with informed, respectful discourse—preserving dignity through awareness as much as through infrastructure.

This mirrors the intent of Child Rights and You's (CRY'S) pan-India campaign “Let’s Talk About It! Period!” launched three years ago to encourage adolescent girls to openly talk about menstruation as a physiological process, address myths and taboos and foster support system, involving families, male peers, teachers and communities.

Crucially, the apex court has backed intent with a clear enforcement framework. District Education Officers are tasked with annual inspections and collection of anonymous student feedback, shifting compliance checks from paper to lived experience. Nationwide oversight rests with the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), reinforcing the centrality of children’s well-being. Private institutions are no longer exempt. Non-compliance may invite penalties, such as derecognition. This marks a shift from paper compliance to outcome-oriented governance.

Yet the verdict's transformative potential will hinge on how well it addresses ground-level gaps. Data from the National Family Health Survey 2019-21 (NFHS-5) shows that while the use of hygienic menstrual methods among women and girls aged 15–24 has risen to 77.3 per cent from 56.7 per cent in NFHS-4, over one in five still lack access to safe, hygienic and dignified menstrual practices.

This points to a broader challenge: menstrual hygiene interventions in India continue to focus largely on products and infrastructure, often overlooking justice-based outcome frameworks. Menstruation is framed largely as a hygiene issue, rather than as a public health determinant, requiring a multi-sectoral response. A school-centric mandate, while critical, cannot address the needs of out-of-school children.

Persistent gaps in sanitation infrastructure, especially in hard-to-reach and resource-poor areas, constrain progress. Girls in these areas face huge challenges related to privacy, safety and hygiene. To fully realise menstrual health as a constitutional right, responsibility must extend beyond schools to local governance systems. Panchayati Raj institutions, frontline workers, school management committees and community platforms all have roles in monitoring, awareness-building and social mobilisation.

Enforcement must be strengthened through clear guidelines, standard operating procedures, public disclosure norms and time-bound corrective actions. Reviving dysfunctional systems, such as defunct sanitary pad vending machines, will require dedicated resources, regular audits and monitoring.

Equally important are ring-fenced budgetary allocations for free distribution of sanitary products. Without assured public funding, implementation risks remain uneven, undermining the universality and enforceability the verdict seeks to guarantee.

The judgement marks a decisive shift in how the state recognises the rights of girls. But constitutional recognition is just a beginning. At CRY, we believe that menstrual justice requires coordinated implementation framework at both national and state levels. This includes convergence across sectors such as health, education, women and child development and water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH); moving beyond product delivery to track dignity outcomes; and creating a dedicated resource corpus for menstrual justice initiatives.

Accountability must bring together government, civil society and corporate social responsibility (CSR) actors, while interventions must be inclusive of children with disabilities, gender- diverse menstruators, and those in marginalised and rural communities. A robust, data-driven monitoring and evaluation system for menstrual health and sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) is essential to inform policy and judicial review.

With this judgement, the journey to secure menstrual dignity for the last girl has begun on firm constitutional ground. The responsibility now lies with institutions and society. This verdict deserves celebration, but more than that it demands sustained action to embed menstrual health firmly within India’s governance and rights framework.

Puja Marwaha is the chief executive at Child Rights and You.

This column was originally published in the appraisal Menstrual health, now a fundamental right in the February 16-28, 2026 print edition of Down To Earth