New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Monday refused to consider a petition challenging the constitutional validity of a provision within the Hindu Marriage Act that grants wives the exclusive right to seek a divorce if cohabitation has not resumed for a year or more following a maintenance decree. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi dismissed the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by law student Jitender Singh, who appeared in person to argue for a gender-neutral interpretation of Section 13(2)(iii) of the 1955 Act. The court expressed strong disapproval of the petitioner’s motives, cautioning against using the legal system to settle personal grievances under the guise of public interest.
During the proceedings, the Chief Justice questioned the petitioner’s personal stake in the matter, asking if he considered himself the representative of the entire male gender. Singh admitted to being involved in matrimonial litigation for several years, a confession that led the bench to label the plea as a means of settling a personal vendetta. The court even considered imposing exemplary costs on the petitioner for what it deemed an inappropriate use of judicial time. The bench noted that the judiciary should not be used as a theatre for personal disputes dressed up as constitutional challenges.
Justice Bagchi reinforced the legislative authority to enact special provisions tailored for women and children, noting that such powers are explicitly granted under the Constitution of India. He remarked that if the petitioner desired complete parity in such specific legal matters, he would need to seek an amendment to the Constitution rather than challenging a special law in court. The bench concluded by advising the student to focus his legal studies beyond his own maintenance proceedings, ultimately refusing to entertain the petition and highlighting the State’s power to protect vulnerable groups through targeted legislation.
