‘FAIR’ SHARE IN HUSBAND’s PROPERTY ON DIVORCE How fair?

Yes, the woman of 21^st century has changed. She can spread her wings and fly. If she doesn’t have the wings, she will look for the broom. But she will find out a way. We’re corny women of today. We do not sit and cry when things go wrong, we step out and get over it. We are educated – we deal with it in a better way. We laugh it off. We do not cry over the spilled wine. We just say – May God kick your ass in the best possible way. We don’t whine, we wine. We stand up for our men but we sit with our girlfriends.

The first time ever we are talking about wife’s share in husband’s property on divorce. The recent amendment is too vague. I know, we can never have a law which satisfies everyone. The harsh reality is that the inequality exists – the gender inequality and not in a particular strata of society but everywhere in some or the other way.

We are a country where we constantly talk about gender neutrality and progressive laws and we are on the brink of passing an extremely regressive law saying a woman needs financial security and in turn, we are jeopardising man’s social security and this would compromise his financial security as well putting the entire burden on a man. But then forget about property, women do not even get maintenance allowance in most of the cases.

Are we trying to make marriage a crime for men and women? We cannot rule out the possibility of educated and adulterous women get maintenance as well as get rid of the husband and live with someone else or marry someone else. When a man can leave you for another woman, so can a woman. Let’s accept it. Our newspapers are evidence of the fact that women have come out of that sati-savitri image and pati is no more a parmeshwar unless his name is Parmeshwar.

Now women will be getting a ‘fair’ share in the property of the husband on divorce. Let’s see if it’s actually a fair provision and to what extent when the exact quantum of compensation has been left to the discretion of the judge. Even if a woman decides to walk out from a few days marriage then she deserves a share in the property as much as a woman who gave herself to the relationship for 20 years. How fair is it for those women who made their marriage work for 20 or 30 long years and how fair is it for men to give away an equal share in their property to a woman who couldn’t stay for even few days? Unjust for both – men and women. This would open gates for women who want to misuse the law against their husbands. If the ancestral property cannot be divided then husband’s share should be calculated and wife should be given half the amount as compensation.  

And can you really compensate a woman for what she did for her husband and kids? Can you compensate for the love and care given in all those years? No matter how ambitious women of today are, we are women at the end of the day – we love men with all our heart and expect the same in return. We chase our dreams but we value relationships as well. I’m someone who doesn’t believe that it is only men who cheat in a relationship. We are all human. Anyone is capable of doing anything. Let’s not underestimate anyone.

Accept it or not, divorce is an emotional and financial disaster for most of the women.

Are we (women) really independent? Are we really equal or we just say it? Well, we aren’t. There are things which a woman can do but a man can’t and vice-versa. If we are really equal then husband also deserves a share in wife’s property. Ah! That’s nowhere mentioned. There can also be a case where wife has more to give than the husband.

This wasn’t enough - The Cabinet has also left it to the judge's discretion granting of divorce applied for under mutual consent after a three year period. There can be cases where when one party develops cold feet or changes his or her mind after applying for divorce under mutual consent clause. This can lead to unnecessary harassment of one party. So an amendment has been introduced to allow the judge to grant a divorce if one party does not appear in court.

India has widened grounds for divorce in last few decades. But the fact is that almost all Indian women experience a sharp fall in standard of living on separation and divorce. This has consistently been ignored by our policymakers. But now laws are coming to their rescue: For the first time ever, the nation is deliberating over legal changes that propose to accord women new equality with men on property rights and lifestyle post-divorce.

Those who say educated women shouldn’t be given any share. What about women who are educated and they are told to take care of their children because they are married in families financially well off. They don’t go out to work for 20 yrs. They just attend page 3 parties. What are they left with after divorce? Despite the qualification, no one would give them a job. Moreover, they also have to give up the kind of lifestyle that they got used to in the past few years.

The cabinet cleared amendments to the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2010. It approved a provision ensuring compensation for the wife and children from the immovable property of the husband in case of a divorce, with the amount to be decided by the court. It also proposed to empower the courts to decide the compensation amount from the husband’s inherited and inheritable property for the wife and children once the marriage legally ends. A new section, 13 (f), has been added for this.

There had been disagreement over whether a woman should have right over property acquired by her husband after marriage only or over his inherited property too. Another proposal was approved by the Cabinet which gave woman the right to oppose her husband’s plea for divorce under “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” clause. The husband has not been given any such right.

A proposal to provide for a quick no-fault divorce after three years of separation was also approved. The proposal allows courts to exercise discretion in granting divorce after three years if one partner does not move a second joint application for divorce with mutual consent.

Live in relationships are also not an alternative as there also a women does not have any set responsibility or conduct. Women still get maintenance from their live-in boyfriends under the Domestic Violence Act. Their children get maintenance from him. Also if the woman decides to take revenge, this will invite rape charges against the man. Punishment for rape is even more stringent today after so many cases have been reported recently. Personally, I do not think live-in relationships are anyway a good idea. A man who loves you wouldn’t mind marrying you.

This is just going to make people resort to ways to hide their property by putting it in the name of other family members, people will find a way out and the woman will be denied her rightful share in her husband’s property.

This legislation is likely to rape men legally and financially. But like I said before - forget property, some women do not even get a maintenance allowance. This is a confused piece of legislation which has confused me. We are still where we were - nowhere. Let’s not forget that this is INDIA, there are n number of ways to not disclose income or property. All this is just going to entangle the woman in extended litigation involving the families as well. I don’t know if it’s fair or unfair but we need a law which is equitable for women without extorting anything from men.

(My personal views are mine. You’re entitled to your own opinion.)