Many people say false cases filed by women in India are only 2-8%. But they never clarify - is this about rape, harassment, domestic violence, or what? And most of the time, they don't even share sources.

According to BBC reports based on Delhi courts and NCRB data, 8% of rape cases were proven false. The Delhi Commission for Women admitted that about 50% of complaints were baseless and clearly false. Keep in mind: proving a case false is very hard, because men need strong evidence like audio, video, or chats. Meanwhile, in rape cases, even a woman's testimony alone can be enough to convict. So if 8% are proven false despite such difficulty, that number is not "negligible" — it's alarming.

Another fact: 25-30% of rape cases are "false promise of marriage/job" cases, and a Gurugram RTI found this to be 43%. But how can this be rape? This changes rape from consent to outcome. If a man promises marriage but later cannot marry, he faces up to 10 years in prison. But when women break promises, men have no legal remedy. If you count these as non-criminal, then nearly 40% of so-called rape cases are fake.

Now, feminists often say, "But many cases go unreported." But how can anyone know about unreported crimes? These are based on assumptions and surveys that rely only on women's statements, and they lump verbal, physical, and sexual assault together - so it's not strictly about rape.

And here's something even worse: even psychological surveys and research are often designed with gender bias. Many studies frame men only as predators and women only as victims. For example, when psychology students conducted a gender dynamics survey in my college, the men were asked questions like "If a man does this to a woman, what will you do?" or "If a woman told you she suffered this..." Meanwhile, women were asked questions like "If you are faced with this situation..." It was shocking to see how the very questions assume men = perpetrators and women = victims, leaving no room to recognize male suffering.

This isn't just anecdotal - even major academic research shows this bias. For instance, a 2018 study in The Lancet on intimate partner violence in India focused almost exclusively on women as victims, with minimal attention to male victims. This reflects a broader academic and cultural pattern where male suffering is understudied, ignored, or dismissed.

And yet, smaller surveys tell another story. A 2014 MyNation survey found that 40% of married men reported abuse from their spouses. A PMC study (PMID: 30983711) showed that in rural Haryana, 52.4% of men experienced spousal violence. These numbers suggest that male victimization is not rare at all – it is simply underreported, because stigma and lack of legal avenues discourage men from coming forward.

Meanwhile, NCRB doesn't even collect data on crimes against men - not on domestic violence, not on harassment, not on false cases. They record dowry deaths but ignore male suicides from marital stress and false allegations. Every year, around 1.8 lakh suicides take place in India, and NCRB data shows that about 40% of these are due to marital or family issues. Since the majority of suicides are by men, this means tens of thousands of men end their lives each year due to marital stress - a figure dozens of times higher than dowry deaths. How can laws be fair if half the story isn't even recorded?

This is why the "but women suffer more" argument fails. Yes, women do face crimes, but laws, society, and media already protect them - even their identity is protected. Men, on the other hand, can lose their job, career, and dignity from a mere allegation. Even if proven innocent later, their life is already ruined. That's not equality, that's injustice.

So the question isn't "who suffers more." The real question is: do we want laws that protect everyone, or laws that punish some while silencing others? If rights are truly about equity, then ignoring men's suffering is not just illogical it's inhumane.