Nothing exemplifies a double-edged sword better than a recent observation by a Madras High Court bench on a maintenance case. Justice P Devadass said that a Hindu man must not expect his wife to earn and self-maintain.
Rejecting the revision petition against a Family Court’s direction to pay maintenance, filed by a Central Government employee, the bench invoked the Hindu Law. Although the court safeguarded the interests of the estranged wife, such surmising appears damaging to the cause of women empowerment at large.
Invocation of a religious philosophy has, unfortunately, taken the sheen off an otherwise fair judgement in this case. Would it have seen a different outcome if the two parties concerned belonged to a different community? More importantly, does this observation inadvertently place the wife under the financial control of her husband? Surely, we can be more nuanced than proposing a blanket obligation of a man towards his wife.