Personal law reform

THE PASSAGE OF the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Bill last week by Parliament is welcome insofar as it incorporates current norms of gender equality into the more than a century old Indian Divorce Act that governs the Christian communities in this country. The overwhelming consensus within various denominations of this religion on some of the key amendments in the Bill is especially noteworthy considering that not long ago, a divergence of views on laws concerning adoption and mixed marriages among Christians led to the deferral of the Christian Marriage Bill of 2000. Under the 1869 Act, adultery alone was sufficient ground for a man to obtain divorce, whereas towards the same end, a woman had to furnish evidence of cruelty, bigamy, bestiality and desertion coupled with adultery against her spouse. Thus, the onus was entirely on Christian women to terminate wedlock.

Under the recent amendments, the incorporation of mutual consent as a basis for the dissolution of marriage and the recognition of cruelty and desertion as independent grounds clearly echo the demands of women's groups for a gender-sensitive law that took on board, besides the conventional stress on infidelity, issues pertaining to the equal rights of women vis-a-vis their male counterparts. In the current scenario where there is growing awareness of the pervasiveness of domestic violence in our society and its underlying nexus with deep-rooted gender biases, it is not in the least surprising that legal safeguards against infliction of cruelty should make their way into various areas of social legislation pertaining to women. Additionally, the recognition of mutual consent as a ground for dissolution of marriages is sure to short circuit the long and arduous process of litigation that until now entangled individuals who were otherwise disencumbered. Parliament has done well to revise the provision on alimony, which until now remained at one fifth of the man's income, enabling this issue to be left to the discretion of the judge.

Quite apart from the specific implications of its different provisions, the true essence of the Indian Divorce Amendment Bill perhaps lies in the fact that it represents yet another instance of the evolution of the law in general in response to the expressed needs of groups and communities for change as well as continuity in their social practices and conventions at particular historical junctures. To that extent, it would be illuminating to view these amendments in contrasting terms with demands for a uniform civil code; a demand that militates against the spirit of viewing the law as a vehicle of change than an instrument of coercion. The rationalisation of personal laws, not without valid reasons, falls principally within the religious sphere and hence must be treated as internal to specific communities. Once this is granted, evidence of actual reform within every religion appears to follow in ample measure. If religious minorities have sometimes been slow to move in the direction of reform, it is because their behaviour is largely conditioned by the movement for social change in the heartland of the respective religion.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Recipe for economic revival
Next     : Implementation issues in the WTO