SC publishes “With warning” discover on PILs for a single legislation on divorce, alimony and little one help
A three-judge Supreme Court (SC) bank, consisting of CJI SA Bobde, J. AS Bopanna, and J. V Ramasubramanian, issued a notice of two public interest disputes that provide unity of personal laws governing divorce, Aimed for alimony and alimony for Indian citizens. Senior Advocate Pinky Anand for the petitioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay. prayed that these personal laws and …
A three-judge Supreme Court (SC) bank, consisting of CJI SA Bobde, J. AS Bopanna, and J. V Ramasubramanian, issued a notice of two public interest disputes that provide unity of personal laws governing divorce, Aimed for alimony and alimony for Indian citizens.
Senior Advocate Pinky Anand for the petitioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay. prayed that these personal laws and religious practices would be under Articles 14, 15 and 44 of the Indian Constitution, as well as other rights conferred by international instruments.
The plea seeks instructions from the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Law and Justice (Legislative Department) and the Ministry of Women’s and Children’s Development.
However, CJI SA Bobde was not convinced by Ms. Anand’s arguments. “You want the abolition of personal laws?” CJI asked what she said no. “They are not saying that it does not mean that this is not the case. CJI continued.
Ms. Anand relied on the Shayara Bano case, in which the Supreme Court recently ruled Triple Talaq’s practice unconstitutional. She also referred to the Sarla Mudgal case, which contained instructions from the Supreme Court to the government under Article 44 in a conflict between personal laws and matters relating to marriage.
“Government is the pulse of the people. They can. How can we as a court intervene in personal laws?” CJI intervened. Ms. Anand argued that prayer consists in eliminating discriminatory practices as a religion and other religious practices that violate the fundamental rights of Indian citizens.
“Did we say in Shayara Bano that the grounds for divorce are the same? What was the discriminatory provision? Triple Talaq was found non-existent because it was an old practice. In this case too, Parliament passed a law that did not comply in this case the same. ” CJI continued.
Ms. Meenakshi Arora, who represents another petitioner, argued that the case was a bigger problem. She said, “Religious practices are one thing. Constitutional rights are another, however. If religious practices directly violate fundamental rights, they cannot be considered protected.”
However, the bank issued a notice in the case, while CJI noted, “We are issuing a notice with great caution.”
The petitioner asked the Court of Justice for instructions.
-Instruction to the Ministry of Interior and Law of the Union to take appropriate steps to eliminate the prevailing anomalies related to alimony and support in order to make them available to all citizens without discrimination on the basis of religion, race, sex or place of birth in Meaning of the Articles 14, 15, 21, 44 and international conventions
-Alternatively, as the guardian of the constitution and protector of fundamental rights, declare that the discriminatory grounds for maintenance and support violate Articles 14, 15, 21 of the constitution and establish gender-neutral religion-neutral uniform guidelines for maintenance and support for all Indian citizens;
-Alternatively, instruct the Law Commission of India to review national and international laws and to prepare a report on “uniform maintenance reasons” within 3 months in the spirit of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 44 and international conventions;
-Constitution which, in the spirit of Articles 14, 15, 21, 44 of the Constitution and the international conventions, seeks “uniform grounds for divorce” for all citizens throughout Indian territory.
Click here to download the petition
Click here to download the petition
Click here to download the order