A Supreme Court bench headed by CJI SA Bobde is hearing a PIL seeking the direction for the Ministry of Home Affairs, Law and Justice and Women and Child Development to make all the personal laws uniform.

Senior Adv. Pinky Anand is appearing for the Petitioners followed by Meenakshi Arora.
The plea seeks the removal of personal laws as they are discriminatory under Art. 14,15 and other provisions of International Covenants.
CJI: You want the abolishment of Personal Laws?
Pinky Anand: No
CJI: You are not saying it doesn't mean that's not the reality.
"You are asking us to encroach upon personal laws and remove the distinction that they create." CJI said.
Pinky Anand refers to the cases of Shayara Bano and Sarala Mudgal to argue that Courts on earlier occasions have struck down laws and gave directions for practices found to be unconstitutional.
"In Sarla Mudgal case the Govt. was asked to step in the case of Uniform Civil Code." she argued.
CJI: Government is the pulse of people. They can do so. How can we as a Court encroach on personal laws?
Pinky Anand: The prayer is to remove discriminatory practices qua religion, qua practices which infringe Fundamental Rights.
"Exactly same thing was done in Shayara Bano case, " she continued
CJI: Did we say in Shayara Bano that the grounds of divorce be same? What was the discriminatory provision?
"Triple Talaq was found to be non existent as it was an old practice. Also, in that case Parliament passed a legislation. " CJI continued
Anand: This court on earlier occasions has passed directions in cases where no prior law was made. Same happened in Sarla Mudgal. That is what we are praying.
Meenakshi Arora: This is a larger issue. Religious practices are one thing. But constitutional rights are another.
"When religious practices directly infringe the Fundamental Rights, they cannot be said to be protected." she argued.
The bench while issuing notice in the case remarked "We are issuing notice with great caution. "

More from Live Law

More from Court

so @tedwheeler did you hear? today we are discussing "public whippings" thanks to @JamesBuchal

its a great chance to study the history of public beatings.
understandably, women feel threatened. https://t.co/jck05JGM4B
#PDX #tourism


FIRST OREGON WIFE-BEATER TO RECEIVE WHIPPING POST PUNISHMENT
https://t.co/3SJOODbuLf
PORTLAND. Or., June 7—The whipping post law passed at the last session of the Legislature was Into execution for the first time today, the victim being Charles Mcdlnty, convicted of wlfe-beatlng

whip was a braided blacksnake, made of rawhide, with four lashes. ..hustled to jail, stripped to the

waist, manacled, and his hands tied to the door high above his head. The whipping was as severe as the powerful deputy was capable of administering. Blood drawn on the 4th blow.
1) God bless the State of Texas and @KenPaxtonTX What he has just done gives us every chance to save our Republic and our country.

Keep in mind that there are only a few instances where a party can file a direct lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court, a state claiming harm by

2) another state is one of those instances.

https://t.co/xvXGDdgDYh

Texas Attorney General @KenPaxtonTX has filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court seeking and emergency injunction against Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia “from taking action to


3) certify presidential electors or to have such electors take any official action including without limitation participating in the electoral college.”

@KenPaxtonTX argues that arbitrary changes made by the state’s governors, secretaries of states and election supervisors were

4) “inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures. The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.”

The lawsuit states: “these non-legislative changes … facilitated the casting

5) and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution.” […] “By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens vote, but

You May Also Like