The gradual pace at which our society is moving towards the humiliation and deterioration of women takes away the futuristic picture of the Indian mentality and brings it down to what it used to be previously. After repeated news headlines regarding offences against women, there have been several complaints in the field of marriage as well.

A recent judgment passed by the Kerala High Court states that comparison of a wife to other women amounts to mental cruelty. ‘comparison’ in general, has taken a toll on mental health for everyone and expecting a married woman to put up with it constantly is unwise. Cruelty in a marriage has been addressed in Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. However, the definition for the term ‘cruelty’ has not been mentioned in the matrimonial laws.

It is the gradual advancement of definitive understanding by the judicial decisions that the meaning of ‘cruelty’ has received an interpretation. In Shobha Rani v Madhukar Reddi[1], the wife alleged that the husband and his parents demanded dowry and while laying down its judgment, the apex court emphasised on the fact that “cruelty” can have no fixed definition.[2] To judge whether or not something is mental cruelty, the nature of the cruel treatment has to be examined, and the mental impact it has on the spouse, and whether it causes reasonable apprehension in the mind of that spouse that it would be “harmful” or “injurious” for them to live with the other spouse.[3]

Cruelty can either be physical or mental in nature and when we require to understand an instance of cruelty in a case, we cannot set any pre-determined standards. One particular act may be cruelty for one whereas not for another. However, from a case-to-case basis, it is at least possible to bring out certain examples of such instances which may act as precedents in future cases. The judgement laid down by the Kerala High Court is one such instance whereby in future cases, comparison of a wife to another can also be clubbed under the category of cruelty. This falls under the purview of mental cruelty which was initially recognised in Dastane v. Dastane[4]. A broader perspective also gives us the idea of validing cruelty as a ground for divorce also because it affects one’s right to dignified life and hence infringes Article 21 of the Constitution.