India has progressed significantly in providing homemakers with the financial independence they truly deserve but are often denied. In 2021, 118 million women from 12 states across India began receiving cash stipends from state governments; what started as an election campaign manifesto became a small step towards a sense of independence for homemakers and an act of gratitude by the state for their unpaid work. As of now, 15 states in India are running this program.

While these welfare initiatives by state authorities have had a lasting impact on state policies, the judiciary has equally contributed to providing legal protections and recognition to homemakers on a national level. Recently, in what many characterize as a landmark ruling, the Indian Supreme Court recognized the contributions of “homemakers” in domestic settings as possessing “independent economic value.”

Shishu Pal @ Shis Ram & Ors vs. Surjeet & Ors, a case that started as a regular road accident compensation case, ended up becoming one of India’s most celebrated judicial decisions of recent times. It restores the dignity and value that unpaid domestic workers, mostly women, have the right to as human beings and paves the way to mitigate the false stereotype that stay-at-home women are not socio-economic contributors. The Supreme Court’s ruling in this 20-year-long case also significantly reshaped the legal recognition and nature of contributions made by unpaid domestic caregivers.

What Exactly Does It Mean?

According to the United Nations, women across the world spend 16 billion hours doing unpaid domestic work and care, yet the value of this work remains structurally unrecognized in most parts of the world, and the social stereotype that they do not contribute to the economy often remains supported. The issue of low monetary compensation in cases involving the death of a “housewife,” or more generally, any individual who does not earn a wage but instead manages the household and cares for its members, was addressed in the judgment delivered in this case.

Previously, there had been multiple cases with similar facts; however, the courts rarely acknowledged the various non-pecuniary losses suffered by the surviving family members. Usually, the court merely determined and calculated the monetary loss to the family caused by the death of a caregiver or homemaker based on the expenses that would be incurred while hiring househelp to complete tasks that were otherwise........

© Paradigm Shift