THE SUPREME COURT RECENTLY REMANDED IN TWO PILS SEEKING UNFORM CIVIL LAW FOR MATTERS RELATING TO DIVORCE AND MAINTENANCE, ASKING HOW COULD IT (SUPREME COURT) ENCHROACH ON IT (PERSONAL LAWS).
THE PRESENT CASE
• In the present case, a three-judge’s Bench headed by CJI Bobde was hearing two PILs seeking uniformity in Personal Laws relating to Divorce, Maintenance and Alimony
• The Petitioner contended that different personal laws based on varying religious practices is in violation of Articles 14, 15 and 44
• It sought framing of uniform laws in matters relating to Divorce, Maintenance and Alimony so that no citizen is discriminated based on religious practices
• Petitioner relied upon the Shayara Bano case (Triple Talaq Case) and the famous Sarla Mudgal Case.
SUPREME COURT’S STANCE
• The Bench disagreed with the Petitioner, and asked if they were asking the Court to abolish Personal Laws
• It rejected the Shayara Bano case clarifying that Triple Talaq was found to be a non-existent old practice on which the Center too had made law abolishing it
• Though the Court ultimately issued a Notice to the Respondents, it remarked that it is doing it with ‘caution’
• The parties made Respondent in the Petition is Union of India through Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Law and Justice, and Ministry of Women and Child Development
DO YOU THINK VARIED PERSONAL LAWS BASED ON RELIGIOUS PRACTICES ARE DISCRIMINATORY? LET US KNOW IN THE COMMENTS SECTION BELOW!
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
