The last line in the guidelines e) It is sufficient if the acceptor declares having obtained the consent of his / her spouse to undergo..........................is sufficient to prove that guidelines are not restrictive but more as directive.
Actually the Govt's guidelines have more focus on 'surgical precautions and negligence, failures, compensations, methods, awareness' etc and the guidelines are absolutely not meant for judicial purpose!!!!
Government of India doesn't/can't compel any female to bear atleast/exactly/ two kids after marriage, whether alive or dead at any point of time!!!
I believe, kohli vs kohli and ghosh vs ghosh cases are become routine reference as a citation and these two couples have created 'model caselaw' and both couples didn't leave any stones unturned while fighting against each other to give a concrete caselaw to whole Indian society!!!
Had they not gone upto SC, many States would have been deprived of its valued reference as a caselaw!!!! I really respect them for their valued service to the whole nations!!!!
The case of Smar Ghosh Vs Jaya Ghosh (two IAS officers and marriage of 22 years, dispute right from beginning) is the rarest of the rare case. The appellant and the respondent had been living separately for more than sixteen and half years (since 27.8.1990).
The respondent's first husband, Debashish Gupta filed a belated appeal against the decree of divorce obtained by her from the District Court of Patna. Therefore, during the pendency of the appeal, she literally persuaded the appellant to agree to the marriage immediately so that the appeal of Debashish Gupta may become infructuous. ..............................soon after the marriage, the respondent asked the appellant not to interfere with her career. She had also unilaterally declared her decision not to give birth to a child for two years and the appellant should not be inquisitive about her child and he should try to keep himself aloof from her as far as possible. According to the appellant, there was imposition of rationing in emotions in the arena of love, affection, future planning and normal human relations though he tried hard to reconcile himself to the situation created by the respondent.
It's worth to take notice of many other aspects where 'mental cruelty' is talked about which is yet not explored by many aggrieved litigants and there is not much of case citations except above (metal abuse is more prevalent in society than physical abuse...so to say)
SC has tried to be uniform !!!...... by way of declaring that ............... .....No uniform standard can ever be laid down for guidance ....In deciding about metal cruelty!!!
Before making whole list of illustrations the SC has quoted following lines in the judgement:
No uniform standard can ever be laid down for guidance, yet we deem it appropriate to enumerate some instances of human behaviour which may be relevant in dealing with the cases of 'mental cruelty'. The instances indicated in the succeeding paragraphs are only illustrative and not exhaustive.
On consideration of complete matrimonial life of the parties........
On comprehensive appraisal of the entire matrimonial life of the parties.......
A sustained course of abusive and humiliating treatment .........
The married life should be reviewed as a whole .........