Customer Support
Call Us Now 24/7
Customer Support
Call Us Now 24/7
Several Hindu men converted to Islam to solemnize second marriages without dissolving their first marriage under Hindu law. The first wives filed petitions alleging bigamy and questioning the legality of such conversions.
The Supreme Court ruled that mere conversion to Islam does not dissolve the first marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act. It also emphasized the need for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) to prevent misuse of personal laws.
Highlighted the conflict between personal laws and the need for a UCC.
After the Shah Bano case, the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, was enacted, limiting maintenance for divorced Muslim women to the iddat period. Danial Latifi challenged the constitutionality of this Act.
The Supreme Court upheld the Act but interpreted it to ensure that a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to a fair and reasonable provision for her future maintenance during the iddat period itself.
Expanded the scope of maintenance under Muslim law while respecting constitutional principles.
Shayara Bano challenged the constitutional validity of triple talaq (instant divorce) after her husband used the practice to divorce her.
The Supreme Court declared triple talaq unconstitutional and struck it down as a practice under Muslim personal law.
Led to the enactment of The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, which criminalized triple talaq.
Githa Hariharan challenged Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, which prioritized the father as the natural guardian of a child over the mother.
The Supreme Court interpreted the provision to mean that either parent could be the natural guardian, based on the child’s welfare.
Strengthened gender equality in matters of guardianship.
A husband sought divorce on the grounds of mental cruelty, claiming his wife had filed false criminal cases against him and his family.
The Supreme Court held that filing false criminal cases constitutes mental cruelty and granted the divorce.
Clarified what constitutes mental cruelty in divorce cases under the Hindu Marriage Act.
A PIL was filed challenging the constitutionality of Section 497 IPC, which criminalized adultery and treated women as the property of their husbands.
The Supreme Court struck down Section 497 IPC, declaring it unconstitutional for violating equality and personal liberty.
Decriminalized adultery, promoting gender equality in family law.
A daughter sought equal rights in her father’s ancestral property under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
The Supreme Court ruled that daughters have equal rights in ancestral property as sons, irrespective of whether the father was alive or not at the time of the amendment.
Ensured gender equality in inheritance and coparcenary rights.
The petitioners argued that Section 498A, which criminalizes dowry harassment, was being misused and led to false charges against husbands and their families.
The Supreme Court issued guidelines to prevent the misuse of Section 498A, advising police to scrutinize the evidence before arresting a person.
Created safeguards against false cases while maintaining the law's intent to protect women from dowry harassment.