It is often argued that wife shall remain a wife even after divorce. I agree that is what courts have interpreted. But the question is-if that is the case and the man remarries after divorce, then is it not bigamy? Divorce must be final break. Partners should have no responsibility to each other-in the name of some nebulous 'sacredness' of the marriage, especially. when everything is done to the contrary. If one has to move with 'modern' times marriage and divorce must be treated as contracts. One man one wife for life is outdated concept. We violated those norms with the concept of divorce which was alien to hindus. Other religions had divorces but this is a borrowed concept for hindus. Sanctity of marriage is degraded and the new reality must be accepted as opposed to fake old concepts. We can't have it both ways and make one party responsible for another while the other has no responsibility!
The idea that courts can 'save' marriages is contrary to what is currently happening. In the hope of saving marriages the couple are subjected to horrendous harassment. The process benefits everyone, except the couples!
Divorce must be made easy. Mediation must not be a consideration, unless both apply for it. The IRBM amendement brings its own share of problems for husbands. The fact that wife can oppose but husband cannot indicates where the law is headed. There is no reason to 'hope' government would change this anytime sooner. The feminist lobby ,which is very strong, will not let that happen!
These laws are raising the ire because good people are being harassed and criminalised.