The Chhattisgarh High Court has emphasized the need for a shift in societal dialogue at home to eliminate discrimination based on skin color, referencing a study that laments the tendency to depict dark-skinned women as under-confident and insecure.
A Division Bench of Justices Goutam Bhaduri and Deepak Kumar Tiwari, dismissed an appeal filed by a resident of Balodabazar district seeking divorce from his wife, ruling that incentives cannot be provided to encourage societal preference for light skin over dark.
The respondent wife, in her defense before the High Court, asserted that her husband sought to abandon her due to her dark skin tone.
The appeal was filed against a family court judge’s order in Balodabazar on July 30, 2022, rejecting the husband’s application for divorce.
The High Court, after evaluating the evidence and considering the allegations of both parties, found the wife’s reasons for the husband’s desire to desert her, based on her skin color, to be more logical.
The judgment referred to a study on skin-color preference to determine the suitability of an individual as a potential partner.
The High Court stated, “In a study on this subject indicates there appears to be a skin-color preference with regard to making decisions about the suitability of an individual as a potential partner.”
The study revealed that dark-skinned individuals were rated lower than their light-skinned counterparts in terms of attractiveness and competency.
The judges emphasized that the choice of skin color should not be incentivized, stating, “The entire society of the human race needs to change the dialogue at home, which may not promote the fairness preference of skin. Therefore, the incentive cannot be given to a husband to promote such a mindset of the society for the preference of light skin over dark.”
The High Court noted that no grounds of cruelty were established by the husband to justify a divorce decree.
According to case details, the couple married in 2005, lived in Dharashiv village, and later moved to Hyderabad for six months before returning to the village.
The husband claimed that his wife, citing financial difficulties, went to her paternal home and refused to return.
The appeal detailed incidents of quarrels and threats of suicide by the wife. A social meeting was convened to address the issues, but the wife did not return home after April 14, 2017, leading to the husband filing for divorce.
The wife contended that she faced torture, abuse, and was driven out of the matrimonial home, staying at her parental village since April 14, 2017.
She alleged abuse based on her skin color and physical assault, claiming her husband wanted to remarry.
The High Court, after considering the cumulative evidence, concluded that no grounds of cruelty or desertion were established by the husband, as required by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and accordingly dismissed his appeal.
