QRant: Dear Madras High Court, What’s With the Misogyny?
Recent decisions by the Madras High Court beg the question: Why are they anti-women?
“A woman has to be faithful to her ‘husband’ even after she is divorced.”
“A happy conclusion to a rape case is when the victim marries her rapist.”
No! This not what a Khap Panchayat or Sadhvi Prachi or a loose cannon Maulvi just said.
This is what the Madras High court seems to think. One of the country’s most respected courts of law may be turning the most misogynist.
In June this year, Justice Devadass granted bail to a convicted rapist, asked him to pay the survivor two lakh rupees, and... hinted strongly that the girl consider marrying her rapist.
Really sir? Accept ‘blood money’? Marry your rapist?
I‘m no legal scholar, but how’s that a “solution” in any modern system of justice?
Then, the Madras High Court chose to weigh in on divorce, alimony and what a divorced woman’s sex life should be like.
A divorced woman, if she wants to keep getting alimony, must keep behaving like she is married. What does that mean?
It means, though she is legally single, she can’t be with other men... she must remain faithful to her ‘ex-husband’!
I know we are a conservative, often regressive, society. But our courts and the law, at least, should be better than that.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)