Shayara Bano vs Union of India - 2017 Supreme(SC) 771

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2017 Supreme(SC) 771

JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, KURIAN JOSEPH, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, UDAY UMESH LALIT, S. ABDUL NAZEER
Shayara Bano – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Advocates Appered:
For the Petitioner: Balaji Srinivasan, Adv.
For the Respondent: Devesh Kumar Tripathi, Applicant-In-Person, Nikilesh Ramachandran, M/s. Equity Lex Associates, O.P. Gaggar, Aparna Bhat, Wajeeh Shafiq, Purushottam Sharma Tripathi, Garima Bajaj, Shadan Farasat, Shadan Farasat, Ejaz Maqbool, Ejaz Maqbool, Shakil Ahmed Syed, Gurmeet Singh Makker, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Advs.

Judgement Key Points

The test of manifest arbitrariness under Article 14 of the Constitution requires that legislation or State action must not be capricious, irrational, or lacking an adequate determining principle. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)

It applies equally to plenary legislation, subordinate legislation, and executive actions, serving as a facet of equality and the rule of law. (!) (!)

Manifest arbitrariness arises when action is excessive, disproportionate, or unreasonable, negating equality by embodying whim or caprice. (!) (!) (!) (!)

The doctrine ensures fairness and reasonableness, striking down measures that fail to balance rights and public interest rationally. (!) (!) (!)

This test complements the traditional classification doctrine, focusing on substantive unreasonableness rather than mere discriminatory treatment. (!) (!)

JUDGMENT

Jagdish Singh Khehar, CJI.

Sl.No.	Divisions	Contents	Paragraphs
1.	Part-1	The petitioner’s marital discord, and the petitioner’s prayers	1- 10
2.	Part-2	The practiced modes of ‘talaq’ amongst Muslims	11- 16
3.	Part-3	The Holy Quran – with reference to ‘talaq’	17- 21
4.	Part-4	Legislation in India, in the field of Muslim ‘personal law’	22- 27
5.	Part-5	Abrogation of the practice of ‘talaq-e-biddat’ by legislation, the world over, in Islamic, as well as, non-Islamic States	28- 29
	A.	Laws of Arab States	(i) – (xiii)
	B.	Laws of Southeast Asian States	(i) – (iii)
	C.	Laws of Sub-continental States	(i) – (ii)
6.	Part-6	Judicial pronouncements, on the subject of ‘talaq-e-biddat’	30 – 34
7.	Part-7	The petitioner’s and the interveners’ contentions:	35 – 78
8.	Part-8	The rebuttal of the petitioners’ contentions	79 – 111
9.	Part-9	Consideration of the rival contentions, and our conclusions	112- 114
	I.	Does the judgment of the Privy C

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2017 Supreme(SC) 771

JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, KURIAN JOSEPH, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, UDAY UMESH LALIT, S. ABDUL NAZEERShayara Bano – AppellantVersusUnion of India – Respondent

Cases Referred (107)

JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, KURIAN JOSEPH, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, UDAY UMESH LALIT, S. ABDUL NAZEER
Shayara Bano – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent