Why some divorce grounds apply only to wives: Supreme Court rejects a man's plea challenging the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a petition challenging a provision of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, that gives wives — but not husbands — the right to seek divorce under specific circumstances related to maintenance orders.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi dismissed the Public Interest Litigation (PIL), observing that the Constitution itself allows the State to make special provisions for women.

The challenge was against Section 13(2)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act. Under this provision, a wife can seek divorce if there has been no resumption of cohabitation for one year or more after a maintenance decree has been passed against the husband.


The petitioner, who argued the case in person, told the court the law should be gender-neutral and equally available to husbands.

But the bench was not convinced.

According to Live Law, quoted by TOI, Justice Bagchi pointed directly to Article 15(3) of the Constitution — a provision that allows laws specially designed to protect women.

“You should have the Constitution amended. This is a special law,” the judge remarked during the hearing.

And then the hearing got sharper.

The court observed that the PIL seemed less like a constitutional challenge and more like fallout from an ongoing personal matrimonial dispute. The bench also warned against using Article 32 — which allows citizens to directly approach the Supreme Court for enforcement of fundamental rights — as a tool to settle personal scores.

“Don't settle personal vendettas through Article 32,” the Chief Justice reportedly told the petitioner.

The bench further noted that while it may sympathise with the petitioner’s personal difficulties, it also had sympathy for his estranged wife.

The court also appeared unimpressed that such a plea was being pursued by someone studying law, observing that it did not send a good message.

Eventually, the PIL was dismissed without notice being issued.

So what exactly is Section 13(2) under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?

Most people know divorce laws broadly exist under the Hindu Marriage Act. But Section 13(2) is different because it gives wives a few additional legal grounds to seek divorce — protections that husbands do not get under the same section.

These include situations where:

• The husband had another living wife at the time of marriage
• The husband is guilty of offences like rape, sodomy or bestiality
• There has been no cohabitation after a maintenance order
• The woman was married before turning 15 and later chose to repudiate the marriage before turning 18

The provision was introduced as a protective measure at a time when lawmakers believed women faced greater social and financial vulnerabilities within marriage.

That historical context became central to Monday’s hearing.

Why this case is triggering debate online

The ruling has once again opened up one of the internet’s favourite legal debates: should all laws automatically become gender-neutral, or do some protections still need to exist specifically for women?

The Supreme Court, at least for now, made its position clear: if the Constitution itself allows special protections for women, then challenging such provisions becomes far more difficult.

(With TOI inputs)