In a striking and satirical post on X by deepika Narayan Bhardwaj, a woman’s journey through two marriages is spotlighted with a blend of humor and critique, highlighting the financial windfall she allegedly reaped from divorce settlements. The tweet features an image of a woman in a courtroom, her face overlaid with a money-obsessed emoji, symbolizing the narrative that she has amassed a ₹5 crore flat in Mumbai, complete with two parking spots, in just 18 months of marriage to her second husband. 

The caption sarcastically dubs her achievement a “B.Div (Bachelor of Divorce)”. It suggests she enroll in the fictitious “Indian Institute of Alimony,” a jab at what the author perceives as an exploitative use of alimony laws. This framing sets the tone for a broader commentary on the perceived misuse of legal provisions meant to support divorced spouses.

The post further elaborates that this woman extracted ₹20 lakh from her first husband and over ₹6 crore from her second, painting a picture of a calculated strategy that turns marriage into a lucrative enterprise. The inclusion of emojis like graduation caps and laughing faces adds a layer of irony, suggesting that such financial gains are treated as an academic or professional milestone rather than a legal remedy for hardship.


This narrative aligns with a recurring theme in Bhardwaj’s posts, where she often highlights cases of men facing significant financial and emotional burdens due to what she argues are biased alimony and domestic violence laws. The mention of Mumbai’s high property prices—where a ₹5 crore flat is a substantial asset—amplifies the incredulity and outrage intended by the post, positioning the woman as a symbol of systemic exploitation.

Beyond the satire, the tweet taps into a deeper societal debate about gender and justice in India’s legal system. The responses it garnered, including calls to expose the woman’s identity to protect future victims and critiques of judicial enabling, reflect a growing frustration among some quarters about the perceived imbalance in divorce laws. Bhardwaj’s commentary, while provocative, invites reflection on the need for equitable legal frameworks that prevent abuse while ensuring fair support for those genuinely in need.




Find out more: