Chennai, India – In a landmark ruling, the Madras High Court has stated that watching pornography and masturbating cannot be considered marital cruelty. The court emphasized a woman’s right to sexual autonomy and privacy while dismissing a divorce petition filed by a man against his wife on these grounds.

A man from Tamil Nadu had approached the court seeking a divorce, claiming that his wife frequently watched porn and engaged in self-pleasure, which he considered unacceptable. However, the court rejected his plea, ruling that such activities do not qualify as marital cruelty unless they significantly impact marital obligations.

Court’s Rationale: Private Acts Are Not Grounds for Divorce

The judgment, delivered by Justices G.R. Swaminathan and R. Poonkodi of the Madurai Bench, clarified that personal choices made in private spaces do not constitute cruelty.

“If a couple watches porn in their personal space and it does not negatively affect their marital duties, it cannot be deemed cruelty or grounds for divorce,” the court ruled.

Additionally, the bench pointed out the double standards in society:

“Masturbation is widely accepted for men, so why should it be viewed differently for women?”

The court did note, however, that extramarital affairs could be grounds for divorce but emphasized that seeking pleasure from one’s own body is not a form of marital cruelty.

Right to Privacy & Sexual Autonomy

The case was originally filed in Karur district, Tamil Nadu, where a family court had already rejected the man’s request for divorce. He had accused his wife of excessive spending, neglecting household duties, and engaging in private acts that he deemed inappropriate. However, the court found no concrete evidence to support his claims.

The ruling strongly upheld the fundamental right to privacy, stating:

“Privacy is a fundamental right, and it extends to marital relationships. A woman’s sexual autonomy is part of this right. As long as it is not legally prohibited, expressing one’s desires should not be restricted.”

The judgment also reaffirmed that marriage does not strip a woman of her individual identity or personal rights, reinforcing the idea that a woman’s autonomy remains intact even after marriage.

Legal & Social Implications

This ruling sets a crucial legal precedent, challenging societal taboos and misconceptions surrounding female sexuality. It highlights the need for gender equality in personal freedoms, recognizing that women have the same rights to privacy and bodily autonomy as men.

As discussions on sexual rights, privacy, and gender equality gain momentum, this verdict from the Madras High Court is likely to influence future legal cases and spark broader conversations about personal freedom within marriage.