Pro-woman judiciary

Joru ki gulami is the best policy, the SC has told the man in a divorce case.
���Biwi joh bolti hai woh suno...,��� a vacation bench of Justice Markandeya Katju and Justice Deepak Verma observed while hearing a lawsuit by Indian Air Force officer Deepak Kumar, who had complained that his estranged wife Manisha had ruined him and his family by implicating them in false criminal cases, including sodomy.���Hum sab bhuktbhogi hain,��� the bench observed. ���If your wife wants you to see this side, see this side. If she wants you to see the other side, do obey her,��� said Katju, adding, ���One who obeys his wife rules the world.���
Sounds like a joke, right? TOI asked men for their reactions to this woman-on-top issue. They were asked two simple questions:
1. The judiciary���s latest remarks have been met with amusement. What would the reactions have been, had the gender roles had been reversed, and the woman asked to ���obey her husband���?
2. Is the judiciary pro-woman, sometimes bizarrely so?
These are the responses from the other side of the gender divide.
���Men, be careful about signing contracts!���
1. For a bench of judges to say such a thing is ridiculous. It trivialises the whole issue and the judicial process. If a woman had been at the receiving end of such a statement, many people would have raised their voices against it. But it���s not a sign of gender discrimination.Women have been subjected to domestic violence and hence, such a comment would ring alarm bells.
2. Society and its norms are against women, and hence, it���s only good that the law is increasingly in favour of women. It���s sending out a strong message about women���s empowerment. A word of caution for liberal men like me ��� be careful while signing any contract!
Sudhir Mishra, filmmaker
���I don���t think anyone took it seriously���
1. I think the reactions would have been, ���How dare he?��� ���This is gender discrimination��� ��� all this would���ve been hurled at the judge. I think the judge made a humorous comment and all the readers had a good laugh. I don���t think anyone took it seriously.
2. I think they���re bending over backwards to correct injustice to women over the last 2000 yearss. In a democracy, everyone should be treated as equal, but democracy also demands that everyone who���s been discriminated against in the past should in some way get an advantageous position. I do think that there should be some kind of compensatory factor for peoplewho���ve been discriminated against earlier.
Alyque Padamsee, adman
���Men should be petrified!���
1. There would���ve been fireworks if it were the woman in his place! If you go to the root of it, there has to be some sort of injustice that women are facing because of which feminist organisations make a noise. Sometimes these organisations and even society goes overboard in protecting women���s rights, but these things will get corrected eventually. We need to empower women and if there is some benefit of doubt that we might need to give women, it���s all cool.
2. I would like the judiciary to be more pro-women. For so many years, we have suppressed women. Now, if we���re passing judgements to help them out, we should go the whole nine yards and be so pro-women that men should be scared of exploiting them.
Prasoon Joshi,
lyricist & adman