The Supreme Court of India recently expressed its strong disapproval of a Bombay High Court judgment that used misogynistic terms to refer to a woman whose marriage was declared void. The Court found the use of terms like “illegitimate wife” and “faithful mistress” deeply problematic, stating that such language is a direct violation of women's fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

The Supreme Court emphasized:

"Every person has a fundamental right to live with dignity. Calling a woman an 'illegitimate wife' or 'faithful mistress' violates this right and is against the ethos of our Constitution."

The Court made it clear that such terminology is offensive, misogynistic, and should not be used in legal judgments, especially when addressing women who are parties to void marriages. It also pointed out the disparity in language, noting that similar adjectives were not used for husbands in such cases.

Read Also:- Supreme Court Cancels Appointment of National Commission for Homeopathy Chairperson

Legal Background: Permanent Alimony in Void Marriages

This observation was made while a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court—comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, and Augustine George Masih—was addressing the issue of whether a spouse is entitled to permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) even if the marriage is declared void.

The Court held that permanent alimony can be granted even after a marriage is declared void under Section 11 of the HMA. Justice Oka, in the judgment, reaffirmed that financial support should be provided to a dependent spouse, regardless of the legality of the marriage.

1. Misogynistic Language is Unacceptable in Judgments: The Court noted its strong disagreement with the Bombay High Court's 2004 ruling in Bhausaheb @ Sandhu S/o Raguji Magar vs. Leelabai W/o Bhausaheb Magar, which referred to a woman in a void marriage as a "faithful mistress" and "illegitimate wife."

"The use of such words is misogynistic and against the principles of justice. It is essential that judgments do not reinforce gender biases."

The Court expressed disappointment that such offensive terms were used in a legal ruling, especially when discussing a woman's right to dignity and respect.

Read Also:- PMLA Accused Cannot Be Kept in Custody If ED's Complaint Cognizance Order is Quashed: Supreme Court

2. Fundamental Right to Dignity Under Article 21: Under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, every individual has the right to live with dignity. The Court reiterated that using derogatory terms for women in legal proceedings directly contradicts this fundamental right.

"No one should use such derogatory language to describe a woman in a void marriage. This goes against the ideals of the Constitution."

The Court emphasized that gender-sensitive language must be used in legal documents and judgments to ensure fairness and respect for all individuals.

3. Supreme Court Allows Alimony Even in Void Marriages: The Court also addressed a key legal question—whether a spouse can claim permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act even if the marriage is later declared void.

In its ruling, the Court upheld that:

A spouse in a void marriage can claim permanent alimony and maintenance under Section 25 of the HMA.

Alimony should be determined based on financial dependency, not just marital validity.

Granting alimony ensures financial security and prevents economic hardship.

Read Also:- Workplace Reprimand for Official Duties Not a Criminal Offense Under IPC Section 504: Supreme Court

Court’s Justification:

"A woman should not be left destitute simply because her marriage has been declared void. The law must ensure her financial security."

The Court rejected the argument that void marriages automatically deny financial rights, affirming that Section 25 applies to all decrees under the HMA, including those declaring marriages void.

In addition to permanent alimony, the Court also ruled that maintenance pendente lite (temporary financial support during litigation) can be granted under Section 24 of the HMA, even if the marriage is void.

Court’s Reasoning:

"Even if a marriage is prima facie void, interim maintenance can still be granted to a financially dependent spouse."

This ensures that dependent spouses are not left financially vulnerable while their legal case is pending.

Read Also:- No Fixed Rule for Half Sentence Requirement for Bail During Appeal: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court’s ruling is part of a broader effort to eliminate gender bias in legal language and judicial decisions.

Recently, the Court also launched a Handbook on Combating Gender Stereotypes, which:

Identifies and explains gender-biased terms used in legal discourse.

Suggests alternative, gender-neutral terminology for legal use.

Aims to create a more inclusive and fair legal system.

This handbook is intended to guide judges and legal professionals in eliminating stereotypes and ensuring gender-sensitive language in court proceedings.

Misogynistic language in judgments is unacceptable and violates women's rights under Article 21.

A spouse from a void marriage is entitled to permanent alimony under Section 25 of the HMA.

Interim maintenance (maintenance pendente lite) can be granted under Section 24 even if the marriage is void.

The Supreme Court is actively working to remove gender bias from legal language and judgments.

Case Details: SUKHDEV SINGH v SUKHBIR KAUR