Source : INDIA TODAY NEWS
Marriage is often treated as a social institution that must be preserved, sometimes at almost any cost. Divorce, meanwhile, can invite questions, judgement and pressure to reconsider. But what happens when preserving a marriage means staying silent about abuse? And how do we ensure that the fight against domestic violence does not become a debate in which every allegation is either automatically believed or immediately dismissed?
advertisement
These were among the questions raised at The Fatal Vow: When ‘I Do’ Turns Deadly, a session at the India Today Conclave Mumbai 2026 featuring lawyer and activist Flavia Agnes, men’s-rights documentary-maker Deepika Narayan Bhardwaj, and psychiatrist, sexologist and couples’ therapist Dr Pavan Sonar.
The discussion brought two sharply different perspectives into the same room. Agnes highlighted the violence women continue to face within marriages and the social pressures that often keep them silent. Bhardwaj argued that men who experience abuse or injustice in matrimonial disputes also deserve to be heard. Between the two was a question that continues to complicate conversations around domestic violence: how do we acknowledge the unequal realities of abuse without dismissing anyone who seeks justice?
For Agnes, the starting point was the language used to discuss violence against women. Referring to National Crime Records Bureau data indicating 16 dowry deaths a day, she challenged the term itself.
“Nobody dies of dowry; they die of violence,” she said, arguing that the focus should be on the violence, whether physical or mental, that drives a woman to suicide or results in her murder.
She also questioned the popular narrative that women routinely misuse laws meant to protect them. In cases of women who die by suicide, she said, many have not approached the police or filed complaints during their marriages. The abuse often comes to light only after their deaths or when divorce proceedings begin.
“There is this narrative that women are misusing the law,” Agnes said. “But among the women who commit suicide, if you see their cases, if you read the judgments, nobody has gone to police.”
The silence, she suggested, is tied to the pressure to preserve a marriage. Divorce may be less stigmatised than it was decades ago, but women can still fear social ostracisation and the consequences of walking away. As a result, allegations of cruelty may surface only when a marriage has reached a breaking point.
Bhardwaj, however, argued that the conversation cannot end with the recognition that women face systemic disadvantages. Men who experience cruelty, she said, can also find themselves struggling to get their complaints heard or their cases registered.
“There are no comparison when we talk about human life, when somebody is wronged, it should not be looked at from the spectrum of gender,” she said.
Citing cases involving men accused of wrongdoing by their partners, Bhardwaj questioned what she saw as inconsistencies in the application of the law. She also pointed to the lack of comprehensive data on men experiencing domestic violence, arguing that the absence of equivalent legal provisions makes the problem harder to measure.
Agnes, meanwhile, she insisted that the scale and context of violence against women must remain part of the conversation. The existence of cases involving men, she argued, does not erase the disproportionate challenges women face within marital homes.
The exchange revealed how easily conversations about domestic violence can become a contest over whose suffering deserves greater attention.
For Sonar, however, the problem begins well before a couple enters a courtroom. Couples often seek help only when their relationship has reached a “point of no return”, he said, pointing to the lack of education around consent, boundaries and relationships.
“Now, about marriage, no one is taught,” he said, arguing that while people are prepared for formal education and earning a living, they receive little guidance on navigating relationships. He stressed the need to teach children about consent, respect and the responsibilities that come with marriage.
That education also means questioning the expectation that women must shoulder the responsibility of making a marriage work, while men may face a different set of pressures around providing for their families. As Sonar noted, changing relationships and family structures have created new challenges that society has yet to fully address.
The discussion did not settle the debate over false allegations, unequal treatment or the scale of violence faced by men and women. But it certainly highlighted the need to move beyond a binary in which acknowledging one person’s suffering is seen as denying another’s.
A marriage breaking down is not, by itself, proof of abuse. Nor does the existence of false allegations mean that genuine complaints should be met with suspicion. The challenge lies in recognising the social realities that can silence victims while ensuring that allegations are investigated fairly, regardless of gender.
Ultimately, the question is not simply whether a marriage can be saved. It is whether people caught in one that has turned abusive can seek help without stigma, and whether the pursuit of justice can make room for every genuine complaint without losing sight of the larger patterns of violence.
– Ends
SOURCE :- TIMES OF INDIA
