Indian court rules that divorced woman must never have sex with another man if she is to continue receiving financial support from her ex-husband
- Ruling was made by high court judge in Madras, on the east coast of India
- Reportedly said a woman having sex after divorce was virtually the same as adultery
- Human rights activists have already attacked the decree as ‘regressive’
An Indian court has ruled that a divorced woman can only continue receiving financial support from her ex-husband if she never has sex with another man.
A high court judge in Madras, on the east coast of India, said that a woman having sex after divorce was virtually the same as adultery, it has been reported.
Justice S Nagamuthu passed his judgment after a case in which a husband said his wife had been living a ‘wayward life’ while she retaliated by accusing him of ‘illicit intimacy’ with his own niece. Human rights activists have attacked the decree as ‘regressive’.
Despite stating that financial support was there to help divorcées, he added that women must also remain faithful to their former partners to merit being given the money.
The Times reports the judge as saying: ‘Even after a decree for divorce is granted, if the wife wants to retain her right to claim maintenance from her former husband, she is expected to continue to maintain the same discipline as she was expected to maintain during her marital ties.
‘Since the man carries the obligation to maintain his divorced wife, the woman also carries the obligation not to live in a relationship with another man.
‘If she commits a breach, she will suffer disqualification from claiming maintenance. If she wants to live in a relationship with another man, she may be entitled for maintenance from him and not from the former husband.’
The Times says activists have taken to social media to attack the decision with the South Asia branch of Human Rights Watch calling for the ruling to be overturned.
She said that such judgements from state courts can sometimes be voted down by India’s Supreme Court which takes a ‘more enlightened views’