“No Mangalsutra or Bindi… Why Would Your Husband Show Interest?” – Judge During Mediation Sessions
"No Mangalsutra or Bindi… Why Would Your Husband Show Interest?" – Judge During Mediation Sessions in Pune
Pune: A judge’s remark during a mediation session at a Pune court has sparked discussions on social media, with many questioning the biases present in the judiciary. The comment was highlighted by Ankur R. Jahagirdar, a disputes lawyer in Pune, in a LinkedIn post where he shared instances of troubling remarks made by judges in district courts.
Jahagirdar recounted an incident from a domestic violence case where the judge, during mediation, addressed the woman and said, “I can see that you are not wearing a mangalsutra or bindi. If you don’t behave like a married woman, why would your husband show any interest in you?” He noted that the couple had been separated for some time, and the judge was attempting to encourage reconciliation. However, the remark has been widely criticized for reinforcing traditional gender roles.
Another Troubling Comment on Women’s Expectations
In the same post, Jahagirdar mentioned another instance where a judge commented on women’s preferences in marriage. The judge reportedly said, “If a woman is earning well, she will always look for a husband who earns more than her and will never settle for someone who earns less. However, if a man who earns well is looking to marry, he might even marry a maid who washes utensils in his house. Look how flexible men are. You should also show some flexibility. Don’t be so rigid.”
Jahagirdar expressed his discontent with such remarks but pointed out a larger issue: the lack of accountability when judges make such statements. “What I didn’t like more is that neither the client nor an onlooker such as myself really had any proper recourse against such off-hand remarks made by judges,” he wrote.
A Larger Pattern of Judicial Bias?
Jahagirdar emphasized that these incidents were only the “tip of the iceberg” and that district courts often witness remarks that would “shock the conscience of any rational-thinking, educated person.” He also noted that societal norms allow tolerance for such biases. “Unfortunately, our society has a baseline tolerance for some outrageous things. Why it is this way is obvious — the first rule of the patriarchy club is you do not talk about the patriarchy club,” he remarked.
These comments are not isolated incidents. In 2020, the Gauhati High Court ruled that a wife’s refusal to wear shakha (a conch shell bracelet) and sindoor (vermillion) was equivalent to rejecting the marriage, a decision that triggered widespread discussions on gender roles. Social media users responded with the hashtag #WithoutSymbolsOfMarriage, sharing images of themselves without traditional marital symbols.
The resurfacing of such judicial remarks continues to raise concerns about gender bias in the legal system and the need for reforms in how courts address marital disputes.
