Bhubaneswar: With the country witnessing the big debate on cruelty on women by men for long, the glare took a 180 degree turn, post the suicide by Bengaluru-based techie Atul Subash. 

For days, the social media has been flooded with stories of cruelty on men by women.

When the cruelty debate has been lingering on, a single judge bench of Karnataka HC has said very big.

Justice Chillakur Sumalatha pronounced in her oral order the following:

“As a matter of fact, women are the primary victims in most situations, but that does not mean that men are not affected by the cruelty of women. Therefore, there is necessity for a gender neutral society.”  

WHAT JUSTICE SUMALATHA SAID ON GENDER JUSTICE

In her oral order, the woman justice said, the following.

• A gender neutral society aims at preventing separation of duties according to sex or gender.
• It will focus on equal treatment of men and women both in domestic affairs and work places.
• Equality should be in its truest sense and not at the expense of either gender.
• However admirable our efforts to safeguarding women may be, we should not overlook the challenges encountered by men in our society.

CASE BACKGROUND

The court was hearing a dispute between a wife and husband over a divorce plea transfer.

The wife has filed a petition in the Karnataka HC pleading with the Court to withdraw and transfer of the case, which is pending before the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Narasimharajapura, Chikkamagaluru District to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Hosanagara, Shivamogga District.

This case is not a dispute on custodial right of the school-going children. Both the children are staying with the respondent-husband.

As the respondent-husband has been facing inconvenience to attend the court proceedings in the divorce case, he sought transfer of the case. The wife filed a plea in HC objecting to the transfer citing the inconvenience she would face on account of the transfer.

WHAT JUSTICE SUMALATHA OBSERVED?

The judge observed that:

• Only because the transfer petition is moved by a woman, transfer of the case as sought for cannot be effected.
• All the attending facts and circumstances have to be looked into.
• This Court is of the view that the inconvenience projected by the petitioner to attend the Court at Narasimharajapura, Chikkamagaluru District will not be greater than the inconvenience that will be faced by the respondent-husband if the transfer of the case is effected.
• Also the tender aged children would be put to sufferance.
• Therefore, this Court is of the view that the relief sought for cannot be granted. Resultantly, the petition is dismissed

Tags: prameyanews