"Self-Proclaimed Leader Of Men,” CJI Pulls Up Man Seeking Gender-Neutral Divorce Rights

The Supreme Court today dismissed a PIL seeking gender parity with respect to Section 13(2)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, which allows only a wife to seek divorce from her husband where cohabitation has not resumed for one year after a maintenance decree against the husband.

"What is your problem with it?" CJI Surya Kant asked petitioner in person Jitendra Singh who challenged provision of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Singh in response said, "I want the provision to apply to both males and females.."

CJI asked him, "How are you affected? You are here for entire gender group.."

When Singh answered that he was suffering in a matrimonial dispute for the last 7-8 years, the CJI said, "I wanted you to admit this.."

The bench went on to ask him if he had paid maintenance to his wife. "Sir, I have handed over my land itself to the wife. That is subject matter of consideration whether court consider it or not. I'm not hiding anything, but I've handed over half of my assets what I had in my name right now. I've handed over," Singh said.

Singh further told court that he was pursuing law.

"You have done your statutory obligation, you have discharged well. Now, whatever litigation you have, you fight over it. We are not saying so. You might be having some genuine grievance. We have sympathy with you, but we have equal sympathy for your estranged wife also. Both of you, if you... maybe that some court will ultimately persuade you for mediation and resolve this dispute. But don't fight this kind of litigation. Sir, this does not send a good message for the law students. Wait for some right time and right opportunity", the bench observed.

The petitioner told court that he wished to serve humanity a bit better because the concept of de facto breakdown of marriage has been discussed by the supreme court, various high courts time and again and again. "Maybe for some or the other reason the government is not taking up... I'm not diverting to that side, but I thought that this being a gender-neutral perspective could have served a lot more perspective to the entire humanitarian aspect," Singh told the bench.

Court went on to dismiss the petition saying that no purpose at all is served. "Your law professors, they will advise you better. Not a case to entertain this petition. Go to the High Court", it said.