Marriage and finances have always been deeply intertwined, particularly in India, where societal expectations often place significant emphasis on a groom’s financial stability. Traditionally, a man is expected to be the provider, and any deviation from this norm invites scrutiny. A recent viral video has reignited this age-old debate, questioning whether a man should be allowed to marry without a regular source of income. The video, which has been widely shared on social media, shows a courtroom scene where a judge is questioning a man sitting in front of him, probably defending himself.

The conversation takes place as follows:

Judge: You don’t have a job?

Man: No, sir. I had written that whenever I am called, I go and give a doctor’s service.

Judge: When they drew the preemption, that was wrong. What did you say about your income?

Man: Sir, I said that I don’t have a job now. When I was called, I wrote that I had a job.

Judge: You are a doctor. You don’t have any right. Only the lawyer has the right to get married without an income. A doctor has no right. If you didn’t have an income, why did you get married?

Take a look at it here:

The conversation has sparked intense debate online, with many questioning the fairness of the judge’s remarks. Social media platform X has been flooded with comments from users expressing a range of opinions. One user wrote, “Your Honor, it’s odd that the court questions the man’s finances but doesn’t ask the woman why she married without income. Shouldn’t both parties’ choices and responsibilities be equally examined?"

Another questioned the legality of the judge’s statement, asking, “Is there any law in any country that requires a male to have a stable income to get married?"

Some sided with the judge’s perspective, arguing that financial stability should be a prerequisite for marriage. “People should not get married without a stable income," one user commented.
Others, however, criticised the judge’s stance. Another person commented, “This judge should let the public know under which law it is written that you can only marry if you have an income. What if the person had an income when he got married and later lost his income? Is that a crime? Pathetic statement by a pathetic judge."

Another user echoed this sentiment, writing, “There is no law as such that if a man doesn’t earn, he can’t get married. And if he’s asking this question, he should’ve asked the wife why she got married to a guy who doesn’t earn."

The debate highlights the larger conversation surrounding gender roles, financial expectations and societal norms in marriage. While financial stability undeniably plays a crucial role in a successful marriage, the question remains: sShouldit be a legal requirement or merely a societal expectation?