ADVERTISEMENT

Saving Men From Wives & Other Acts of SC Justice Anil R Dave

Justice Dave ruled separating a man from his parents is cruelty. Not the first time he’s stirred a debate. 

Published
India
2 min read
Supreme Court Justice Anil R Dave. (Photo: <b>The Quint</b>/Hardeep Singh)

Supreme Court Justice Anil R Dave has ruled that separating a man from his parents is cruelty. That “in normal circumstances, a wife is expected to be with the family of the husband and normal without any justifiable strong reason, she would never insist that her husband should get separated from the family and live only with her”.

1. Ladki... Paraya Dhan

While many might agree with him on the tradition, the ruling in a divorce case that stretched on for 15 years raises a very basic question – how can the law support the bias that women who leave their parental home are only following the natural course?

Photo: <b>The Quint</b>
Photo: The Quint

Justice Dave, though is not stranger to headline-making judgements and statements. Here’s a short list.

2. The Dissenting Judge Strikes

In a rare move, the Supreme Court, on 18 July 2013, recalled its own verdict and scrapped the government’s proposal to hold a common medical entrance exam (NEET). The decision of the three-judge bench was not unanimous, and was preceded by reports of a leaked judgement. Justice AR Dave was the dissenting Judge on the bench that included Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir.

Photo: <b>The Quint</b>
Photo: The Quint
ADVERTISEMENT

3. Advocating Bhagwad Gita

Speaking at a conference organised by the Gujarat Law Society, the former Solicitor to the Gujarat government, Justice Dave lamented how the ‘guru-shishya parampara' had been lost and led to problems like violence and terrorism in the country. He went on to strongly advocate the Bhagwad Gita in schools.

Photo: <b>The Quint</b>
Photo: The Quint
ADVERTISEMENT

4. Ending the Agony

On July 27, 2016 the Supreme Court heard Yakub Memon’s last-ditch petition to stay his execution. Justice Anil R Dave was part of a two judge bench that said “Let his agony end... but can we allow him to keep filing petitions after petitions?”

This was in response to Yakub’s counsel who pleaded that his client was “in agony and that the government was not right in hurrying into a question of life and death.”

Photo: <b>The Quint</b>
Photo: The Quint

(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.)

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Stay Updated

Subscribe To Our Daily Newsletter And Get News Delivered Straight To Your Inbox.

Join over 120,000 subscribers!
ADVERTISEMENT