REALIZING GENDER JUSTICE IN MARITAL OBLIGATIONS :EVALUATION OF JUDICIAL TREND IN INDIA

Introduction
Women’s rights within a family can be construed only by conceptualizing the term ‘family’ and the
myriad forms existent in both liberal/ Western and conservative/ Eastern societies. Since family is the
central institution in maintenance of women’s equality vis a vis men on the paradigms of reproductive
autonomy, expression of sexuality, conformity to cultural roles and prevailing customary practices
at domestic and International level depends solely on efficacy of State Action and categorisation of
violence against women as non ‘private’ matter.
International Human Rights law mandates that the State parties are obliged to combat familial
violence, domestic violence, Intimate Partner violence1 whether by sexual or non-sexual partners of
married or unmarried women by enacting the same as criminal offence so as to punish and prevent
further acts of violence thereby guaranteeing equal protection to women under law.2 Further the
State obligation doesn’t end with enactment of a penal statute but essentially making available the
incidental civil remedies and mechanisms in the form of compensation, custody of the children,
mandatory counseling in divorce proceedings to assess the mental health of the disputing parties.
In consonance with the International Human Rights mandate, India has undertaken number of
women centric measures namely, establishment of women’s commissions, conferring public health
benefits, setting up of fast track courts et al in addition to various legislative provisions. The debate
involving prosecution of women as adulteress under ‘Section 497 of Indian Penal Code’ continues to
be grappled from Macaulay’s time, similarly Cruelty provision entails dilemma of ascertaining the
psychological factors and balancing the conflicting interests of the parties namely Husband, Wife and
relatives while instituting criminal proceedings and with the end objective of doing justice.
The res integra given by the Supreme Court3 firstly, in declaring section 498A Bailable and
Compoundable for curbing the misuse of the said section thereby ensuring gender justice was
evident in series of subsequent feminist judgements; secondly, expanding the notion of ‘Domestic
relationship’4 and thirdly, the husband was acquitted on the ground that per se extra marital affair is
not a constituent element for Cruelty, though, in the particular case the wife had committed suicide.5
Thus the research paper is impelled with concerned decision and the aftermath which has re-infused
the mythical demand for eradication of patriarchal beliefs within the bench, gender sensitization and
appointing adequate number of women judges. The case has been discussed in detail to postulate
mutually exclusive relation between provisions relating to cruelty and abetment of suicide.