Shreya Gupta
On 13th February 2025, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, in a significant ruling, expressed strong disapproval of a petition that referred to a woman as a “divorcee” in its case title. Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul, while hearing the case, observed that such terminology is inappropriate and reflects a discriminatory mindset. The Judge pointed out that if a woman is labelled as a “divorcee” after her marriage ends, then the man who divorced her should similarly be referred to as a “divorcer“. The Court emphasized that using “divorcee” as if it were a woman’s identity, akin to a surname or caste, was unjust and should not be encouraged.
Taking a firm stance against such practices, the Court directed that petitions using the term “divorcee” against a woman’s name should not be registered or entertained. To ensure strict compliance, Justice Koul instructed that this order be placed before the Chief Justice of the High Court for the issuance of a circular prohibiting the use of such language in legal documents. The Court further suggested that these instructions be communicated to all subordinate courts, reinforcing the importance of respectful and neutral language in judicial proceedings.
The Court expressed its deep concern over the unfair treatment of women through such terminology, stating that it is painful to see a woman being addressed in a manner that perpetuates social stigma. It strongly asserted that such practices should not only be discouraged but completely eradicated. As a corrective measure, the Court mandated that if any motion, petition, or appeal contains the word “divorcee” in the cause title, the court registry must refuse to register or process it.
To institutionalize this change, the Registrar Judicial was directed to present the judgment before the Chief Justice, seeking further orders for the issuance of official circular instructions. These instructions would ensure that no such petitions are entertained in the future and that all subordinate courts comply with the directive. Alongside these directions, the Court dismissed the review petition in question and imposed a fine of ₹20,000 on the petitioner, reinforcing its commitment to eliminating discriminatory terminology and fostering gender-sensitive language in legal proceedings.
Case Title: Parvez Ahmad Khan v. Areeb
Case Number: RP No.96/2022 In RFA No.04/2021
Bench: Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul