A case of suicide by an engineer from Uttar Pradesh’s Jaunpur, Atul Subhash, who was working in Bengaluru, has sparked huge debate on men’s rights and harassment that may happen after marriage. This incident has brought up the debate on social media regarding cultural norms, legal frameworks, and balance between gender-related laws.
An elderly video dated 2006 on erstwhile women and child development minister Renuka Chowdhury appears, stoking fresh trouble. Here, Chowdhury has been speaking with regards to domestic violence acts that law makes on “Let men suffer.”
Viral Video Sparks Debate
During the interview, she was asked by a journalist a question about parts of the bill she was advocating for, pointing out concerns over potential misuse. Responding to this, she said, “If the so-called innocent husband is innocent and his behavior and attitude towards his partner is of mutual respect, then there is no anxiety and no need for men to suddenly feel victims.”
Watch:
Meet Renuka Choudhary, the woman behind India’s regressive Domestic Violence Law. When confronted about its one-sidedness, she replied, “Let men suffer.”
(2006 Devil’s Advocate with Karan Thapar) pic.twitter.com/gZbzcL5zhy
— Rishi Bagree (@rishibagree) December 11, 2024
When questioned regarding the amendments to the law in the future, Chowdhury said, “There’s always a need for corrections and amendments in any law as we progress, as a society develops and the needs arise. But for what? Hypothetically, before we reach the bridge and cross it if you want me to make amendments, I won’t.”
On whether men should suffer before changes to the Act are made, she responded humorously, “That’s not a bad idea except I have such pity for men.” She also emphasized, “Any law is better than no law at all” when it comes to protecting women.
Social Media Reacts
This has elicited a lot of backlashes on the internet. Many have attacked it as it reflects an unfair attitude towards the administration of justice. One user says, “This remark isn’t just a statement—it’s a chilling reflection of how justice was sidelined for vengeance. Domestic violence is real, and women’s safety is critical, but should fairness be sacrificed?”
Another wrote, “Imagine a young boy falsely accused or a father dragged into endless litigation—how is that progress? Laws should unite, not alienate. The government should have built a system that offers justice to everyone, not just a chosen few, but they haven’t, yet.”
A third user questioned the lack of safeguards in current legislation, saying, “Very easy to bring such laws, difficult to curb misuse? Why is the current government not adding safeguards to these laws?”
Once again, the resurfaced video and tragic incident of Atul Subhash have flared up discussions on fair laws and their misuse. While making sure that women are safe tops the list, many are of the opinion that this fairness in legal protection cannot be sacrificed, calling for a system in which all are protected.
