The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that a qualified woman’s decision to pursue her career and provide a stable environment for her child cannot be treated as “cruelty” or “desertion” in a marriage.
A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta criticised the “regressive” and “feudalistic” approach taken by a Gujarat family court and later upheld by the Gujarat High Court in a divorce case involving a dentist and her husband, an Indian Army lieutenant colonel.
The top court said branding a woman’s attempt to pursue her professional goals as cruelty was “highly objectionable and deplorable” at a time when women were leading various professional fields.
The bench said marriage does not erase a woman’s individuality or professional identity and added that both spouses must balance marital responsibilities while respecting each other’s aspirations.
The court observed that expecting a woman to sacrifice her career and follow traditional notions of an obedient wife was “archaic” and “ultra-conservative”.
The dispute arose after the woman, who married in 2009, moved from Kargil to Ahmedabad during her pregnancy because of medical complications faced by her daughter, who suffered seizure episodes. She later established a dental clinic in Ahmedabad.
The family court had granted a divorce to the husband on grounds of cruelty and desertion, saying the wife prioritised her career over matrimonial obligations and had a duty to live wherever her husband was posted. The Gujarat High Court upheld the ruling.
The Supreme Court upheld the divorce only on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage and removed the adverse observations made against the woman by the lower courts.
The bench said what had been portrayed as defiance was actually an assertion of independence shaped by professional commitments and concern for the welfare of the child.