An order issued by the Madras High Court (HC) raises controversies about law and orthodoxy. The court has held that an unmarried man and an unmarried woman systematically indulging in sexual gratification will be considered to be legally married. This decision was on an appeal from the Coimbatore HC which had asked a man to pay maintenance for children born to a woman who had long been living with him. But the woman’s plea for maintenance was rejected. The HC upheld the appeal. What then is the significance of the marriage contract? If a man over 21 years and a woman over 18 have consensual sex, that will be treated as marriage. The woman should then be entitled to maintenance. If there is a severance of the relationship, the man cannot marry without the permission of the previous partner. One hopes that the moralistic aspect of the Madras HC order will be eliminated.
There should be equality between the sexes on inheritance rights. Women should have the right to custody of children and maintenance. Female feoticide should be banned. The law is making progress towards equality but the language of the law should not be in any way vague. Protection of women should be a democratic right and not a patriarchial gift. The vocabulary of women’s honour and personal autonomy as well as bodily integrity should be rightly asserted. There must be recognition of a woman’s rights and obligations. All this still cause a great deal of complexity. The Madras HC order has resulted from the prevailing confusion.