Law considers women as belonging to weaker section of society requiring more protection: Bombay High Court

In a recent order, the Bombay High Court, while transferring a matrimonial case, observed that the law considers women as belonging to the weaker section of the society and, thus, their inconvenience must be given paramount importance when considering transfer petitions [Rahul Uttam Phadtare vs Sarika Rahul Phadtare].Single-judge Justice Shriram Modak was hearing two transfer petitions, one of which was filed by wife praying that plea by her husband for restitution of conjugal rights pending in Pune, be transferred to Thane district. The husband, on the other hand, sought transfer of the wife's divorce petition to Pune.The judge noted that the husband has the custody of both the children and has to manage his business and also look after the children. However, it opined that since the husband himself has stated that children are looked after by his mother and sisters, his plea for restitution for conjugal rights could be transferred to Thane, where the wife's divorce plea is already pending."Even though this reason (of husband) may be of some importance, the fact that the applicant (wife) is a lady, her inconvenience (in travelling) needs to be given more priority because the law considers woman as class belonging to weaker section of society and needs more protection," the Court held..Further, the Court said that in such matters, if a wife claims that she was ill-treated during cohabitation with the husband and that she fears for her life, the same can be considered for allowing her plea."If a wife comes with a grievance that during cohabitation she was being ill-treated to great extent and on that background if there is danger to her life to visit the place where her husband is residing certainly it can be considered as a ground for transfer," Justice Modak observed, adding that in the present case, the wife had taken such a ground..The Court did consider the contention of the husband, who undertook to pay for the wife's travelling expenses, whenever she would visit Pune. However, the Court found that the husband didn't raise any other "special ground" to show that the wife was financially sound to travel to Pune for every hearing.Therefore, the bench dismissed the husband's plea and allowed the wife's petition by transferring the pending matrimonial cases of the couple to Thane..Advocate Sangeeta Salvi appeared for the Husband. Advocate Akshay Kapadia represented the Wife. .[Read Order]