₹49 ₹499 · Rakhi Special — full access to every mock, practice set & book, today only · Claim before midnight
← Index: Important Supreme Court Judgments — One-LinersChapter 10
Study Guide · Chapter 10

H. Personal Law, Religion & Gender Justice

Free study material · concepts, shortcuts & solved questions

Select any text to highlight or save it
Case Year Bench Holding
Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum 1985 5-judge Held a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to maintenance under the secular Sec. 125 CrPC even beyond the iddat period — the ensuing political controversy led Parliament to pass the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.
Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India 1995 3-judge Held a Hindu husband who converts to Islam solely to contract a second marriage without dissolving the first (under Hindu law) commits bigamy under Sec. 494 IPC — conversion alone does not dissolve a valid first marriage.
Danial Latifi v. Union of India 2001 5-judge Upheld the constitutional validity of the Muslim Women Act, 1986, but read it harmoniously with Shah Bano — interpreted it to mean a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to a fair and reasonable provision extending beyond the iddat period, not merely maintenance confined to it.
Shayara Bano v. Union of India 2017 5-judge 3:2 — held instant "triple talaq" (talaq-e-biddat) unconstitutional and void as manifestly arbitrary; the ruling led to Parliament enacting a 2019 law criminalising the practice.
Indian Young Lawyers Assn. v. State of Kerala (Sabarimala case) 2018 5-judge 4:1 — held Sabarimala temple's exclusion of women aged 10–50 violated Arts. 14, 15(1) and 17, and was not protected as an "essential religious practice" under Art. 25. (A subsequent nine-judge reference on essential religious practices across faiths, framed in 2019/20, remains pending.)

Notes. Shah Bano and Danial Latifi should be read together, not as opposed — Danial Latifi is the Court reconciling the 1986 Act's text with Shah Bano's spirit rather than reversing it. Sarla Mudgal is frequently tested alongside the (still-unenacted) Uniform Civil Code debate under Art. 44.

Mnemonic. "Shah Sarla Danially Shayara's Sabarimala" (SSDSS) — Shah Bano (1985) → Sarla Mudgal (1995) → Danial Latifi (2001) → Shayara Bano (2017) → Sabarimala (2018). Notice the bookends: it starts with "Bano" (Shah Bano) and almost ends with "Bano" again (Shayara Bano) — two different women, two different questions (maintenance vs. triple talaq), thirty-two years apart.


Page 1 of 1
← Chapter 9TOC IndexChapter 11