The killing of Indore-based transport entrepreneur Raja Raghuvanshi in Shillong on June 12 has every element of a pulp thriller—an elopement disguised as a honeymoon, a pre-arranged ambush, eight arrests so far, and an SIT that, as recently as June 27, traced two prime suspects to a hide-out in Madhya Pradesh. Yet the deeper scandal is the speed with which public debate has converted one individual’s depravity into a referendum on gender and women’s autonomy.
When a man murders, we name the perpetrator; when a woman is in the dock, we indict her gender. That reflex says more about India’s insecurities than it does about the crime itself.
READ I BRICS summit to put local currencies at the heart of trade
Patriarchy’s playbook opens
Police transcripts suggest that Sonam Raghuvanshi and her partner Raj Kushwaha planned the killing weeks in advance, allegedly wiring Rs 3 lakh to two hired hands who have since retracted their confessions. The conspiracy was a product of personal pathology, not female emancipation. Still, the commentary loop is already blaming women’s education, dating apps and modern values.
Logic is turned on its head: India’s place on the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index has slipped to 131 out of 148, with women occupying barely 15 per cent of senior political and economic posts; yet instead of asking why half the population remains under-represented, the chorus demands fresh curbs on female freedom. That is the patriarchal playbook in action—reduce a complex social tragedy to a morality tale that vindicates inherited prejudice.
Media: From witness to accomplice
Newsrooms have not helped. Headlines such as “Killer Bride” and “Honeymoon Murder” deliver clicks but also entrench stereotypes of the “dangerous independent woman”. Responsible journalism separates fact from inference; it does not recycle assumptions that financially autonomous women are somehow more deceitful.
The victim’s family deserves justice, not a morality play that paints every graduate from a Tier-II city as a potential femme fatale. Editors who pride themselves on watchdog journalism must remember that watchdogs bark at wrongdoing, not at women who choose their partners or professions.
The silent gender fault lines
The real story lies elsewhere—hidden in the unglamorous gaps of public policy. First, emotional literacy: Indian classrooms teach calculus but not conflict-resolution. Introducing basic modules on rejection, anger and impulse control—tested successfully in pilot projects run by the NCERT in two states—would reduce the tendency to treat violence as catharsis.
Second, mental-health neglect: the country has 0.75 psychiatrists per 100,000 people, against the WHO norm of three. Marriage is still packaged as a cure-all, stifling candid conversations about depression, anxiety and compulsive behaviour. Third, exit routes: divorce, while legally available, is socially stigmatised and procedurally slow; families often block separation, trapping couples in toxic unions. Strengthening mediation cells and expanding the family-court network—announced in principle by the Law Ministry last week—would make lawful exits less daunting.
Finally, cultural reform: each time a woman errs, patriarchy seizes the moment to question every woman’s right to autonomy. That cycle will remain unbroken unless policy, pedagogy and popular culture push back together.
Merton’s warning revisited
Sociologist Robert Merton argued that societies promise goals while denying legitimate means; the resulting strain drives some individuals to deviance. Sonam Raghuvanshi inhabited precisely such a trap. Personal instability combined with social pressure—be the dutiful bride, keep the marriage intact—and a dearth of psychological support to create a perfect storm. None of this excuses murder, but it does explain why emotional dysfunction can escalate into violence when lawful exit ramps are blocked. Policy must widen those exit ramps, not narrow women’s horizons.
Justice must be swift and seen to be done; misogyny must be exposed and resisted. Women need not be paragons to merit liberty, just as men’s freedoms survive their worst offenders. Parliament’s standing committee on home affairs, which meets next week to review crime against women, would do well to look beyond policing to the structural deficits of counselling services and matrimonial law. Meanwhile, media platforms should recalibrate their outrage meters, reserving moral indignation for the act of murder, not the gender of the accused.
The true tribute to Raja Raghuvanshi is not the collective vilification of women but the construction of a society in which emotional breakdown does not translate into bodily harm—and in which women’s freedoms remain non-negotiable. Condemn the crime; reject the misogyny. That is the only civilised response.
Dr Manisha Mirdha is Associate Professor and Dean Students’ Welfare, National Law University, Jodhpur.