BWS rose as a way of explaining apparently irrational behavior of women who choose to kill rather than leave a man who abuse them. A great need to defend women who have suffered tremendous physical and psychological abuse cannot be ignored. But by confessing and even reinforcing apparent irrationality of their behavior, BWS reinforces incapacity and inferiority in women who invoke it. Present trends indicate that women may suffer as a result of this legal awry. Battered women may be apparent as suffering from a permanent condition which causes them to be untruthful on a witness stand, inadequate in caring for and protecting air children, dangerous to children or oar vulnerable persons in air care, unreliable in protecting a interests of legal clients, and beyond hope of rehabilitation.
Additional, Indian jurisprudence on BWS has not progressed beyond a Nallathangal syndrome. Thus is an essential to reflect upon a progress made in our jurisdictions relating to BWS and accordingly initiate a comprehensive discourse on battered women who retaliate and air interaction with a law in India. I propose legislative reformulation of a defence of provocation and self-defence in India. By a BWS, reformulations should focus on undoing a male-orientation of a defence and take into consideration the experiences of battered women who retaliate, and why they retaliate. A reformulation of a defence should be watched from a feminist perspective and take into consideration women’s experiences of violence. From a judicial viewpoint, it is critical to focus on procedural equality and feminist writing of judgments. Focusing on violence and protecting the rights of battered women will contribute significantly to challenging traditional stereotypes that delegitimize experiences of women. This will help ‘ungender’ in Indian Penal Code and authorize a voices of women who are systematically excluded.