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.
In the MATTER OF Jones David HOLLISTER
A171609.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
July 8, 2020.
https://t.co/qB3G8IAtxS we must correctly interpret the statute.
Stull v. Hoke, 326 Or. 72, 77, 948 P.2d 722 (1997).
legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary

Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and Mooney, Judge, and Hadlock, Judge pro tempore.

https://t.co/oJuecwvEKc


Bruce L. Campbell, John C. Clarke, and Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP filed the brief amicus curiae for Transgender Law Center, interACT, and Beyond Binary Legal.

Does ORS 33.460 permit the circuit court to grant a legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary? The circuit court concluded that the statute does not permit such a change, and it denied petitioner's application under ORS 33.460
1/It seems apparent that the rulings in my case & was the Travis judiciary has allowed/ignored us related to the fear/coercion of #AlexJones and of his audience and employees who harassJudges & jurors.

.@FBI pls investigate the 3.07 violations, donations & defamation/slander..


2/I am aware that such coercion & perception has had real impact on my children’s lives & these cases Alex files against me.

Alex’s counsel has threatened me “accidentally” & tells my representation & others lies to coerce them to stay on team good-ol-boy$.

3/Why doesn’t the Court protect my kids? I filed a Temporary Restraining Order before the Thanksgiving that any judge should immediately grant: #AlexJones publicly intoxicated/getting wasted while he is enjoined (disallowed to) drink while he has my kids. The Court must fear him

4/No judge may be persuaded by coercion or benefits of ruling the way their main donors demand. No litigant can coerce judges or witnesses. Witness tampering very clear, documented by probative evidence as fraud in Alex’s lawsuits against me. .@fbi investigate pls

You May Also Like