The Allahabad High Court recently called for amending the Hindu Marriage Act to include irretrievable breakdown of marriage as grounds for divorce, considering modern lifestyles.
Justice Vivek Kumar Birla and Justice Donadi Ramesh noted that society is more permissive and individualistic in nature saying, “education, financial independence, breaking of caste barriers, modernisation and effect of Western culture also affect a relationship between two people”. The provocation was an appeal moved by an ex-Army doctor against the family court’s refusal to grant him a divorce from his wife, though they had lived apart for six years by the time he moved court.
It always takes longer for the law to catch up with societal norms, so as things stand today, there is no legal recourse for couples keen to end a marriage for what many may consider to be a haphazard, non-reason like ennui. The idea of irreconcilable differences remains puzzlingly intangible, akin to the whimsical demands of a spoilt child. Because bruised and battered by life in general, Indians tend to be depressingly pragmatic when it comes to matters of the heart.
The first question from family for women contemplating a separation usually is ‘Is he beating you?’ or ‘Is he an alcoholic?’. God knows the answer better not be ‘the magic’s gone’ or something as banal as ‘we don’t enjoy each other’s company’. The logic being, on the scale of potential disasters hovering ominously all the time, tedium doesn’t qualify as a problem. The situation must be dire, as if only a physical threat justifies abandoning the institution of marriage.
All this valiant plodding towards domestic stability clearly stems from the fact that the more mundane aspects of daily living in India remain fraught — right from water and electricity, to traffic and money stresses.
So, most of us can’t afford uncertainty in our personal lives as well. However, a new generation has lost patience with the idea that they need to stick it out in substandard relationships, judging by the 30 per cent increase in filings for divorce by mutual consent in the last decade in cities like Delhi and Mumbai.
An older lot will likely shake their heads disapprovingly at anyone making the dramatic leap, from mechanically responding to the drudgery of life, to seeking out something better (but risking that whatever follows might be worse). It is the main peril of having plenty, the conviction that something vital is missing; but then, emotions and feelings overrule wisdom passed down.
One of the main areas where eastern philosophy diverges from Western thought is in how we address the complex question of how best to spend our brief time on earth.
The ethos in the East is there’s nothing unique about misery but calmly accepting turmoil as transient takes the sting out of its rippling effects. Perhaps, centuries of believing that something special awaits beyond earthly horizons has made us experts in delayed gratification.
Translated to marriage, just because a heady cocktail of love neuro-chemicals have worn off doesn’t mean any new, imaginary destination has the answers.
Conventional belief says time will heal the bond. Urban Indian youth are more in tune with Western practicality; if you don’t like something, change it.
Even if romance tends not to last, the thinking goes, the pursuit of lasting happiness is a right.
There is no overarching truth in either choice, no definitive path that comes with guarantees. We are destined to face the same quandaries the people who came before us have; some parts will work out and some won’t.
It’s worth remembering the famous tragedy Anna Karenina, where one storyline leads to ruin but the other thread resolves with a glorious wedding. There’s always hope that once the chaos settles, new joys will surface again.
The writer is director, Hutkay Films
Just because a heady cocktail of love neuro-chemicals have worn off doesn’t mean any new, imaginary destination has the answers
14
1
10.03.2024
The Allahabad High Court recently called for amending the Hindu Marriage Act to include irretrievable breakdown of marriage as grounds for divorce, considering modern lifestyles.
Justice Vivek Kumar Birla and Justice Donadi Ramesh noted that society is more permissive and individualistic in nature saying, “education, financial independence, breaking of caste barriers, modernisation and effect of Western culture also affect a relationship between two people”. The provocation was an appeal moved by an ex-Army doctor against the family court’s refusal to grant him a divorce from his wife, though they had lived apart for six years by the time he moved court.
It always takes longer for the law to catch up with societal norms, so as things stand today, there is no legal recourse for couples keen to end a marriage for what many may consider to be a haphazard, non-reason like ennui. The idea of irreconcilable differences remains puzzlingly intangible, akin to the whimsical........
© Indian Express
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Rachel Marsden
Donald Low
Bradley Blankenship
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
Abbas Juma
Michael Kwet
