CHENNAI: Dubbing it as ‘inhuman,’ Madras high court censured a judicial magistrate for denying maternity leave to an office assistant who remarried after the demise of her first husband, on the grounds that there was no proof of the remarriage. The district munsif cum judicial magistrate, Kodavasal in Thiruvarur, even went to the extent of doubting the fact of pregnancy on the grounds that the marriage appeared to have been after the pregnancy.
Setting aside the order returning the application for maternity leave, a division bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice G Arul Murugan directed the registrar-general of the high court to pay Rs 1 lakh as compensation for the mental agony she had suffered.
“It is high time the judicial officers reform themselves and take a pragmatic view of things,” the bench said.
“The action of the judicial officer, to say the least, is inhuman. In the days when even live-in relationships are recognised by the Supreme Court, the judicial officer appears to have taken an archaic view of the matter,” the bench said.
According to the petitioner, after the demise of her husband in 2020, she fell in love with another man and married him in 2024. On Oct 18, 2024, she applied for maternity leave, which was rejected on the grounds that she had not produced a marriage certificate.
Her counsel submitted that the marriage was solemnised in a temple as the petitioner was a young widow and therefore, it could not be registered. The photographs of the marriage and the invitation were also filed. A complaint lodged by her claiming that the man cheated her on the promise of marriage was also relied upon, he said.
However, the judicial magistrate rejected the application on three grounds: that the marriage was not registered, the FIR lodged cannot be treated as proof of marriage, and that the pregnancy appeared to be prior to the marriage. “No doubt, maternity leave is granted to married women. A marriage need not be compulsorily registered. The employer cannot seek proof beyond doubt for the fact of marriage unless it is disputed,” the court said.