The Supreme Court, in litigation concerning menstrual hygiene products, sanitation in schools, and related welfare measures, has articulated menstrual health and hygiene as part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, aligning it with health, dignity and privacy already read into that provision.
This matters because it shifts menstrual health from a discretionary policy/welfare matter into a justiciable fundamental right, enforceable via Article 32 (Supreme Court) or Article 226 (High Courts). The reasoning draws support from Article 14 and Article 15 (sex-based indirect discrimination through inadequate facilities), Directive Principles under Articles 39, 42 and 47 (used interpretively, not enforceable directly), and Article 21A, since poor school sanitation causing absenteeism links menstrual health to the right to education.
Remember: this follows the Court's long-standing pattern since the late 1970s of expansively reading Article 21 to include unenumerated rights like health, livelihood, privacy and environment. Menstrual health is the latest addition, though courts remain cautious about directing the specific design of welfare schemes, which stay within executive discretion.