The case raised significant public debate across several topics, which most prominently included law vs tradition, social reform vs conservatism and feminism in both British-ruled India and England.

Janardhan Pandurang passed away when Rukhmabai was aged two and six years after her husband's demise, Jayantibai married the widower Sakharam Arjun, an eminent physician and social activist in Bombay.

[2][1][3] In March 1884, Bhikaji sent a legal notice to Sakharam Arjun via his lawyers Chalk and Walker, asking him to desist preventing Rukhmabai from joining him.

Eventually Sakharam Arjun sought legal help and via lawyers Payne-Gilbert, and Sayani provided grounds for Rukhmabai's refusal to join Bhikaji.

[5] Specifically, criticism of Justice Pinhey's decision came from the Native Opinion, an Anglo-Marathi weekly run by Vishwanath Narayan Mandlik (1833–89) who supported Bhikaji.

A Pune weekly run by Balgangadhar Tilak, the Mahratta, wrote that Justice Pinhey did not understand the spirit of Hindu laws and that he sought reforms by "violent means".

In the meantime, a series of articles appearing before and during the trial, in the Times of India penned under the pseudonym a Hindu Lady also caused public reactions.

On 4 March 1887, Justice Farran, using interpretations of Hindu laws, ordered Rukhmabai to "go live with her husband or face six months of imprisonment".

Everywhere it is considered one of the greatest blessings of God that we are under the protection of our beloved Queen Victoria's Government, which has its world wide fame for best administration.

At such an unusual occasion will the mother listen to an earnest appeal from her millions of Indian daughters and grant them a few simple words of change into the book on Hindu law- that 'marriages performed before the respective ages of 20 in boys and 15 in girls shall not be considered legal in the eyes of the law if brought before the Court.'

This jubilee year must leave some expression on us Hindu women, and nothing will be more gratefully received than the introduction of this mere sentence into our law books.

[8] Rukhmabai received support from the likes of Edith Pechey (then working at the Cama Hospital) who not only encouraged her but helped raise funds for her further education.

[16] Other supporters included Shivajirao Holkar who donated 500 Rupees for "demonstrating courage to intervene against traditions",[17] suffrage activists like Eva McLaren and Walter McLaren, the Countess of Dufferin's Fund for Supplying Medical Aid to the Women of India, Adelaide Manning and others who helped establish "The Rukhmabai Defence Committee" to help gather fund towards supporting her cause of continuing education.

[16][21][14] In 1929 after her retirement, she published a pamphlet titled "Purdah - the need for its abolition" arguing that young widows were being denied the chance to actively contribute to Indian society.