About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

8 Indian J. Const. L. 87 (2019)
Arbitrary Arbitrariness: A Critique of the Supreme Court's Judgement in Shayara Bano v Union of India

handle is hein.journals/ijcl8 and id is 101 raw text is: 




   ARBITRARY ARBITRARINESS: A CRITIQUE OF THE SUPREME
   COURT'S   JUDGEMENT IN SHAYARA BANO V UNION OF INDIA

                                                   Alok  Prasanna Kumar*

                               ABSTRACT

    Arbitrariness has long been a ground used  by courts to strike down
    administrative action in India. Its appicabiity to legislation has been a
    matter of contention until the issue was put to rest by the Supreme Court
    of India in Shayara  Bano  v Union  of India, where it was used by
    Justices Naiman,  Joseph  and Lalit  to strike down trip/e talaq as
    unconstitutional. However, this line of reasoning is phiosophical'y and
    jurisprudentially unsound, and may  need re-consideration though the
    /arger outcome of the triple talaq case is correct. The central idea i b
    which I write this paper is that while subjecting executive action to the
    doctrine of arbitrariness may  have been  constitutionally envisaged,
    subjecting Parliamentary action to such standards is absolutely not so.

 I.  Introduction

        A  Consttuton Bench of the Supreme Court of India set
aside  talaq-e-biddat (or triple talaq)  in Shayara  Bano   v Union   of
India.'While  the  judgement was initally considered to be a 3-2
judgement   against  the legal validity of triple talaq, a closer scrutny
leaves  us  with  an  altogether  absurd  2-1-2   result!2 Jus6ce  Kurien



*   The  author is a Senior Resident Fellow  at the Vidhi Centre for Legal
    Policy.The author thanks Aarthi Rajan, Shankar Narayanan, Siddharth Sonkar
    and Zoheb  Hossain for their comments on an earlier version of this article.
    The  author also thanks Charith Reddy and Sushmita Patel for their help in
    research and editing. Any errors are the author's alone.
    Shaara Bano v Union of India, (2017) 9 SCC 1, T 395.
2   See Girish Shahane, Secular d6il code: nith trzle talaq struck down its time to reform
    other    unjust   faith   based    laws,    Scroll.in,  available   at

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most