The observations were made in the context of the Constitutionality of Section 497 and how the provision was rooted in the treatment of women as ‘property’ or ‘chattel’ of husbands, thereby recognising only the husband as the ‘aggrieved party’ who was entitled to initiate prosecution for an offence under the said provision.
Thus, the observations were in the context of whether adultery can be a criminal offence considering the fact that the provision which criminalised adultery was based on Victorian morals which recognised a wife as her husband’s property.
It was not in the context of discounting adultery as a ground for divorce or other implications on personal law, since the same was not under consideration before the apex court.
Source: Barandbench
