indeed this law seems to be partial. I was what made the constitution to pass such law .... This kind of laws has both advantage and disadvantage.

I hv seen many women after marriage wrongly accuse the groom parents for being abuse and all and file for fake divorce case.. This law may be beneficial to prevent such fake cases...

while women in  who suffer abusiveness from husband and in laws would not b we able to escape from the situation due to this law.. I think law should be made specific to a situation. Currently this law seems to be very generic..many if them would take unnecessary ad

rambabu wrote:

anil wrote:

Divya wrote:

anil wrote:

Most of you are against this decision, but I am not. EVery society have some traditions. These are important. It is tradition in Hindus and peoples of others society that parents is liability of son. You are talking why parents can't live with daughters. You are right but, if parents decide to give equal share of their properties to their daughter, sons will agree for it? Never

Let me put a situation to you.... As is happening many indian households... The girl does not bring enough dowry...after a few months of torture n trying to extract whatever they can from the bride ...they file the case saying she is trying to separate the parents... What will the bride do...who is at fault here.....

Next,  whether the man and wife stay with their parents or not it's a personal choice... It should not be used as a ground for divorce...and since you talked about traditions...since when did seeking divorce become a part of our tradition....

I'm sorry if am harsh here... But I can't come to terms with this judgement...it's downright partial...to say the least

First thing I am not in favor of dowry and any type of physical and mental harshement of bride. Noting will happen if some one file fake case, decision is hand of court.

Divorce is  not part of tradition it evil who spoiled many life.

 Divorce is not a custom in Hindu culture. Husband and wife  are compared with a cart. They are supposed to execute with equal responsibility in maintaining the family.

Agreed wife is also called Ardhangani, in Hindu culture.

Divya wrote:

anil wrote:

Divya wrote:

anil wrote:

Most of you are against this decision, but I am not. EVery society have some traditions. These are important. It is tradition in Hindus and peoples of others society that parents is liability of son. You are talking why parents can't live with daughters. You are right but, if parents decide to give equal share of their properties to their daughter, sons will agree for it? Never

Let me put a situation to you.... As is happening many indian households... The girl does not bring enough dowry...after a few months of torture n trying to extract whatever they can from the bride ...they file the case saying she is trying to separate the parents... What will the bride do...who is at fault here.....

Next,  whether the man and wife stay with their parents or not it's a personal choice... It should not be used as a ground for divorce...and since you talked about traditions...since when did seeking divorce become a part of our tradition....

I'm sorry if am harsh here... But I can't come to terms with this judgement...it's downright partial...to say the least

First thing I am not in favor of dowry and any type of physical and mental harshement of bride. Noting will happen if some one file fake case, decision is hand of court.

Divorce is  not part of tradition it evil who spoiled many life.

Exactly.... But ths judgements implies upholding both these malpractices... Domestic violence n divorce. And as far as a case is concerned.... In India you just need a good lawyer to Ben's thing ur way.... We hv umpteen examples for thatI

Yes Indian law have many loop holes and a smart lawyer may used these. But it is not possible in all cases. Case of Asha Ram and Shara Sree is its example.

This blog written by an educated lady questions the judgment which clearly shows a double standard because on the one hand the woman leaves her parents forever and if the man leaves his parents it is termed cruelty..Laughable indeed !

http://jfwonline.com/article/women-leaving-parents-is-tradition-men-leaving-parents-means-divorce/

usha manohar wrote:

This blog written by an educated lady questions the judgment which clearly shows a double standard because on the one hand the woman leaves her parents forever and if the man leaves his parents it is termed cruelty..Laughable indeed !

http://jfwonline.com/article/women-leaving-parents-is-tradition-men-leaving-parents-means-divorce/

Leaveing parents home by women are not a latest thing. This practice is from thousand years. not only in India but in whole world.

Shyamlal Vajpayee, grand father of Atal Bihari like one saying very much and repeat it many times. I am writing here only meaning of it.

Brides never cry at the time of farewell after marriage, but she say loudly, dear what you are doing with me, I will do with you, means you are separating me from my parents and so I will separate you from your parents.

Divya wrote:

rambabu wrote:

Though the Judgement is partial which I did not like personally. If the wife forces her husband to get away from his parents she deserves a divorce. My question is what if the Parents themselves persuade the  children, what would happen ?

Can't agree at all on that....plz remember we are talking about an adult man here and  not a 4 year old kid. How can someone force him to get away from his parents...

First of all it's always easy to put blame on someone else's daughter and not on their own son. Secondly, there are many cases nowadays in which daughters-in-law do take a rigid stand of not staying with the in-laws and certainly in some cases an ugly turn takes place between husband and wife. It do lead to separation and divorce. I am of the opinion that the whole thing should be handled mutually. If both of them want divorce then it should be granted but not on the ground of separation from the parents rather the judgement should base on the lack of understanding between the two adults.

It was a sexist judgement and a patriarchal one too. Our traditions were never against females. It is only when the patriarchal views creeped in and  swallowed the goodness of society and paralyzed it with gender biases.

I am really worried about the misuse of this judgement. Domestic voilence, Family abuse, Want of a male child from the bahu and daily mom-in-law and daughter-in-law tussles can be misused and taken to the divorce court. who suffers?? It is the female.

It is totally partial. What if the in-laws do not allow the girl to meet her parents at her wish? Can she file a divorce that she is being separated from her parents?

I think this gives support to another ill practice and atrocities against women under the blanket of our tradition. And I feel it does not glorify our Indian tradition but demeans it.

In our country when we are going through the propagation of "Beti bachao, Beti padhao".

This judgement just adds to it -"Beti bacha, beti padhao aur phir shaadi ke baad use bhool jao".

Because in our tradition, girls after marriage can not stay with their parents. So if you are a parent of girl, you can not have a budhape ki laathi. Infact, you are ill fated and deserve to suffer in old age because your daughter has to take care of her in-laws and if she ignores them to take care of you, her marriage will be on rocks.

I would have been really glad if judgement would have been - "if your spouse irrespective of your gender, tries to separate you from your old parents, you can seek divorce." This would have given equal rights to both a son and daughter in the society and equal sense of pride to parent whether you have a daughter or a son.

That would have been glorifying our tradition and supporting "Save the girl child"