Right to privacy, instant triple talaq, age of consent: Landmark Judgements of The Apex Court in 2017

From making privacy a fundamental right to declaring instant triple talaq invalid, the Supreme Court passed some landmark judgments in the year 2017.. As the year draws to a close, we look back at some of the crucial judgments passed by The Supreme Court Of India.

Privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution
JUSTICE K S PUTTASWAMY (RETD.), AND ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA
In a landmark judgment passed by a nine-judge bench, the Supreme Court ruled that individual privacy is a fundamental right emerging from guarantee of life and personal liberty under Article 21. The bench ruled that privacy included the preservation of personal intimacies, the sanctity of family life, marriage, procreation, the home and sexual orientation.

Triple talaq made unconstitutional 
SHAYARA BANO v. UNION OF INDIA
The Supreme Court ruled that the practice of instant triple talaq or talaq-e-biddat in the Muslim community is invalid. The SC bench headed by then Chief Justice of India J S Khehar, set aside the practice by a majority of 3:2.

Abortion law
MURUGAN NAYAKKAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
On October 7, the apex court allowed a 13-year-old girl to terminate her 31-week pregnancy after it was detected that the teen would be in as much danger as the child she was bearing, during delivery.

Age of consent increased to 18
INDEPENDENT THOUGHT v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
The Supreme Court criminalised sexual intercourse by a husband with his wife who is under 18 years. The top court struck down the exception clause under Section 375 IPC. With this judgment, sexual intercourse by a husband with his wife who is below 18 was made punishable under IPC.

Linking PAN card to Aadhar
BINOY VISWAM v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
The Centre’s amendment to the Income Tax (IT) Act making it compulsory for assessees to link their PAN and Aadhaar numbers passed judicial scrutiny with the Supreme Court upholding it. The apex court rejected the contention that the changes had the effect of making Aadhaar which was “voluntary” under the Aadhaar Act into a “mandatory” requirement.

Anti-dowry law
RAJESH SHARMA & ORS v. STATE OF U.P. & ANR
The Supreme Court on July 27 amended the anti-dowry law and issued slew of guidelines for dowry related investigations. The court required districts to constitute Family Welfare Committees and directed that passports of individuals involved in the case would no longer be rescinded as well as Red Corner Notice would not be a routine.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.