Law

THE INDIAN FAMILY FRAME---- RESPONSIBILITY OF LAW *Dr. K. Uma Devi **Dr. G. Indira Priya Darsini

Introduction:

Family is a basic and universal unit of human society. It performs functions that are necessary for the continuity, integration and development of social life. In most traditional societies family has been the unit of social, cultural, religious, economic and political activities and organizations. In modern industrial societies, the family performs primarily the functions of reproduction, socialization and provision of emotional satisfaction.

A family is a domestic group of people, or a number of domestic groups, typically affiliated by birth or marriage, or by comparable legal relationships including adoption. There are a number of variations in the basic family structure. Throughout history, families have been central to human society; a key indicator of a society's well-being is the health of its families. For this reason, as stated in Article 16(3) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "The [family is the] natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State." The family is the basic social unit for the expression of love between man and woman and the creation and raising of children. The family tames the wilder impulses of men to the responsibilities of fatherhood, enables young women to blossom as mothers, and cultivates morality in children. Moral virtues, empathy, and good human relationships are learned in the family. An important indicator of the social value of the family is the capacity for strengthening the link between generations, in other words intergenerational relations. The procreative and educative dimensions of the family constitute an indisputable economic factor which must be recognized as such.[1]

The family is the "basic community of society". The public authorities must therefore protect it, because it comes before the State and any political organization. This essential protection has been the object of law.[2] Law is the key centralizing institution possessed by modern societies. Law is increasingly being called upon as a tool to address the post-conflict situation and facilitate societal changes. It is increasingly assumed that law can and should play a central role in both the resolution of and progression from conflicts. The reasons put forward for this increasing role of law include the (growing) interrelationship between public order and legal order, and the expanding reach of law due to global forces: the human rights dictum is a global norm due indeed to globalization. It is assumed that the goals of the post-conflict society are synonymous with the capacities and reach of the institution of law.

If the family is a communion of persons, its self-fulfillment depends significantly on the correct application of the rights of the individuals of which it is made up and

guarded by law. Some of these rights directly concern the family in its specificity, such as the parents' right to responsible procreation and to the education of their offspring; other rights instead generically concern the family nucleus: among these the right to ownership is uniquely important, especially to so-called "family" property, and the right to work.

India with plethora of customs, diversity of faiths, and large numbers of people, the largest democracy in the world, India at the same time encompasses an almost incomprehensibly complicated history, one that to this day has made it impossible to reconcile certain problems in its secular legal system. Most of family law in India is determined by the religion of the parties concerned. [3] Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists come under Hindu law, whereas Muslims and Christians have their own laws. The laws of all communities except the Muslims are codified by an act of parliament. Muslim law is based on the Shariat. There are other sets of laws to deal with criminal and civil cases like the CrPC and the IPC.

HISTORY OF FAMILY FRAME: During the ancient times the Indian sub-continent was inhabited predominantly by Hindus. The legal system took its colour from the Hindu religious and social practices. The Hindu society was characterized by the caste system and the joint family system. The 4 castes in the order of importance were (a) Brahmins or the priests (b) the Kshatriyas or the warriors (c) the Vaisyas or the merchants and (d) the Sudras or the workers. Castes apparently originated from an individual's occupation and mobility between the castes was not unknown. In the later years castes became rigid and inter-caste mobility was not permitted.  The Hindu joint family was originally a family of Hindus related by blood living together sharing common food shelter and properties. The family rather than the individual was the social unit in ancient India. The family (not the individual) owned properties. The Hindu family was patriarchal in nature. The eldest male was the head of the family and enjoyed considerable powers over the rest of the family. His position was akin to the pater familas under the Roman law. The law applied was on the basis of ancient religious texts and authoritative commentaries on these texts. The kings under advice of his ministers and learned Brahmins administered the law. The king also appointed judges to administer the law.[4] Law at the village level was administered by a village panchayat consisting of 5 or more members. The system of professional lawyers appearing for the litigants appears to be unknown.  The Muslim invasions of India began around the 11th century AD. Gradually vast portions of India came under the Muslim rule. Muslim law and Muslim judicial institutions were established in India. The fountainhead of justice was the Sultan or the Mughal emperor. He established a hierarchy of courts in the districts and in provinces. Appeals lay from one court to the other and ultimately to the Sultan or the emperor. The Panchayats continued in the villages administering Hindu law. As the courts were presided over by Muslim judges, the law administered was the Shairat or the Muslim Law. [5]

  The British came into India as traders in the 17th century AD and gradually conquered the entire sub-continent. They established their own set of courts and judges. The law administered by them was the English law as extended to India. However in matters of personal law, the British applied the Hindu law or the Muslim law depending on the religion of the subject. Assessors initially assisted the judges in matters of personal law but these assessors were later dispensed, as the judges became more knowledgeable in personal laws.[6] Even today different personal laws govern Hindus and Muslim. A substantial portion of the Hindu law has been codified by the Indian Parliament after independence. The Muslim law is as yet uncodified. Courts apply Muslim law based on authoritative commentaries and on precedents.  The modern state of India and its cumbersome legal system is rooted in its past history of a largely Hindu populace living under Muslim and British rule. The Indian constitution cannot escape this, and its framers did not intend that it would. Enshrined in its basic laws are references to “the wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion” and others mentioned specific to the nature of India. These group-specific reservations are a result of the fear that the exclusion of any one group’s mention might mean the fragmentation of the subcontinent. Nowhere is this clearer than in the struggle secular India has had to reconcile with its large and assertive Muslim community. The Congress party, which dominated Indian politics from independence through the 1990s, saw fit to placate Muslim voters through non-interference with Islamic personal law as it stood in India. This policy, which was in direct opposition to the Constitution's call for a “uniform civil code throughout the territory of India”, has led to much debate and some monumental court cases and legislation in the last 50 years of Indian history.[7] It must also be noted that the support to the Islamic personal law is only for the Civil laws and not for the Criminal laws. Due to this variance, an Indian Muslim gets highest benefits from the civil problems among all other Indian communities and Islamic communities of other countries. Indian Muslims do not want Shariat laws for their criminal acts and receive equal treatment as any other Indian community. However, they demand less severe punishments for their criminal and terrorist activities.

With the passage of time, the Muslim personal law has been under assault from many directions, and it is important to examine how this legal principle of a separate religious law has survived in a country whose constitution is modeled after the secular liberal states of the west. Originally, the law had been enacted in 1865 and had exempted Hindus as well, but the concept seems to have been that Hindus could accept ‘modernization’ and that, since Muslims had a very complicated inheritance system based in the Quran, therefore the law would be applied to Hindus. The Special Marriage Act of 1872, which was essentially a secular civil marriage law, also exempted Muslims from its purview and in fact a Muslim could not marry under the law without renouncing his faith, however, not all calls to exempt Muslims were accepted.[8] The Evidence Act of 1872 included a section 112 that related to the legitimacy of children and was later found to apply to Muslims, regardless of the fact that it was not in line with Muslim law. This dual legal system whereby some laws applied to Muslims but others specifically did not

served as a basis for later laws passed under the Indian government that would exempt Muslim Personal Law from their scope.

With the formal independence of India from Britain in 1947, Anglo-Hindu law and the other major personal law system of the colonial period, the so-called Anglo-Mohammedan law (Islamic law) came under the constitutional authority of the new nation. In the early 1950s, contentious debates ensued over the so-called Hindu Code Bill, which had been offered in the Indian parliament, as a way to fix still unclear elements of the Anglo-Hindu law. Though a small minority suggested some kind of return to classical Hindu law, the real debate was over how to appropriate the Anglo-Hindu law. In the end, a series of four major pieces of legislation were passed in 1955-56 and these laws form the first point of reference for modern Hindu law: Hindu Marriage Act (1955), Hindu Succession Act (1956), Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (1956), and Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (1956).

ROLE OF PERSONAL LAWS: Legal identity [9] promises a host of goods that have tremendous potential to improve people’s lives. In the interest of the individual, Family Issues are dealt under the area of Personal Law or we can simply call this area Family Law. Family Law basically governs matters relating to marriage, divorce, inheritance, succession, adoption, maintenance, guardianship and custody of children and cover related normative practices such as child labor, girl child exploitation or prostitution, it may also extend to religion as well, hence sanction for specific cultural and religious practices, control of religious institutions, like places of worship, or community education facilities, including minority languages. In some countries these would be called traditional textual law, and community or communal law, perhaps customary laws, which underpin certain autonomy of cultural rights Specific to these communities with which the secular state and other community groups, whether in majority or minority, may not interfere. In a growing multicultural, multilocational and pluralist world, these signs of greater autonomy, marks of distinctive self-identity and sensitivity to the moral heritages of the disparate cultural groups are indeed welcome. Pluralism is the backbone of good and healthy democracy anywhere.[10]

Preamble begins with the words 'We, the people'. It follows with the source that religious laws are perceived to be eternal and immutable, while secular rules can be changed by their makers. Religious law tells people what to believe as well as how to behave, whereas secular law deals with our external actions as they affect others. In a religious legal system disputes are usually adjudicated by an officer of that religion, so the same person is both judge and priest. In a secular system, by contrast, the office of judge is separate, and is often reinforced by guarantees of judicial independence. A further difference lies in the enforcement of the laws: in a secular system sanctions are imposed in this world, and its severest punishment (the death penalty) amounts to forcible removal from the jurisdiction. The sanctions and rewards of a religious system may also occur in this world, but are often to be felt most keenly in the next.

Private law defines who counts as a person able to enter into legal relations and deals with their legal capacity (so as to protect the very young or the mentally ill). Since the abolition of slavery, all human beings count as persons. Furthermore, these natural persons may set up other 'artificial' legal persons Private law is the name commonly given to that vast area dealing with the legal relations between persons. It covers matters of pure status (marriage, divorce, kinship and so on); matters involving assets of some sort (property, succession, contracts); and commercial activities in the wider sense. Its essential feature is that the participants are presumed to be juridical equals (unlike the public law structure where relations are hierarchical) so that one cannot give orders to another, unless so authorized under some previous contractual or family arrangement. Its essential technique is that much of it is not automatically binding (Jus Cogens in lawyers' language) but serves to cut down the cost of legal transactions by providing a set of patterns which citizens may use if they wish.[11] For instance the intestacy rules operate only if a person dies without having made a will. The rules on sale, lease, loan, partnership and so on are there as models which can be adopted in full or modified if the parties so desire.

RESPONSIBILITY OF LAW IN DIFFERENT STEPS OF LIFE: Registration of birth, death and marriage with state authorities is an essential feature of a modern society. The first two have been institutionalized in India.

BIRTH: Birth Registration as the First Right to Identity' Article 7 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) says, "The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and, as far as possible, the right to know and be cared by his or her parents." Ironically, this aspect of child rights has been lost in translation in India where a large percentage of child births go unreported and where large numbers of female children are not even allowed to be born but are killed in the womb itself.[12] A birth certificate is a very important document to prove the existence of an individual. It is essential for school admissions, for property rights, and even for contesting elections. Birth certificates are touted to provide greater access to services, benefits, and opportunities; greater protection of human rights and security; improved development planning and a more legitimate and equitable distribution of public resources.[13]

PRO-LIFE: An abortion is the removal or expulsion of an embryo or fetus from the uterus, resulting in or caused by its death. The spontaneous expulsion of a fetus or embryo before the 20th week is commonly known as a miscarriage. Induced abortion is the removal or expulsion of an embryo or fetus by medical, surgical, or other means at any point during human pregnancy for therapeutic or elective reasons. The approximate number of induced abortions performed worldwide in 2003 was 42 million.[14] The moral and legal aspects of abortion are subject to intense social debate. Aspects of this debate can include the public health impact of unsafe or illegal abortion as well as legal abortion's effect upon crime rates, and the ramifications of sex-selective practices. Other debates may include suggested but unproven effects of abortion including the abortion-breast cancer hypothesis, post-abortion syndrome, and fetal pain. Section 312 of the Indian Penal Code, defines the offence of 'causing miscarriage' as follows "whoever

voluntarily causes a woman with child to miscarry shall, if such miscarriage be not caused in good faith for the purpose of saving the life of the woman, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 3 years, or with fine, or with both; and, if the woman be quick with child, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 7 years, and shall also be liable to fine.[15] Medical Termination Of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (MTP Act)[16] was implemented from Apr.1972. Implemented rules and regulations were again revised in 1975 to eliminate time consuming procedures for the approval of the place and to make services more readily available. The MTP Act, 1971 preamble states" an Act to provide for the termination of certain pregnancies by registered medical practitioners and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto".CHILD-HOOD: Right to decent life, livelihood, right to education, etc., are provided under Indian constitution itself to the children. The tenderness and innocent childhood is protected by law in various ways. Law and legal systems are expected to protect the children from abuse of authorities either at home or at schools or at systems of administration of justice duly considering their childhood, innocence and incapacity to understand. Children below seven years are exempted from criminal liability. Their act is not treated as an offence at all. This means that there can be no corporal punishment even under penal provisions based on the principles of doli incapaxi.[17] Similar exemption is extended to children of above seven years and under twelve of immature understanding under Section 83 of IPC. In essence, a child cannot be subjected to ordinary methods of physical punishments including imprisonment for the offences owing to their age and incapacity of formulating a malicious intention. Thus for being a student and having a committed a wrong of not doing home work or violating a dress code, should not invite any corporal punishment. Indian Penal Code Section 88 protects an act which is not intended to cause death, done by consent in good faith for person's benefit. Master chastising pupil fall under this clause, A head teacher who administers in good faith a moderate and reasonable corporal punishment to a pupil to enforce discipline in school is protected by this section and such an act is not crime under Section 323. Section 89 of Indian Penal Code protects an act by guardian or by consent of guardian done in good faith for benefit of child under 12 years. However the same section says that this exception will not extend to cause death, or attempting to cause death, causing grievous hurt. These provisions extend to teachers having quasi-parental authority i.e., consent or delegation of authority from parents also, of course, with exceptions. Using excessive force, causing serious injury, purpose being very unreasonable can turn the act of the guardian or teacher with the consent of guardian, an offence, because such incidents are outside the scope of "good faith".

Juvenile Justice Act, 2000: Section 23 of new Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 provides punishment for cruelty to juvenile or child. Whoever, having the actual charge of or control over, a juvenile or the child, assaults, abandons, exposes or willfully neglects the juvenile or causes or procures him to be assaulted, abandoned, exposed or neglected in a manner likely to cause such juvenile or the child unnecessarily mental or physical suffering shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six

months, or fine, or with both. This section has no exceptions to exempt parents or teachers. Though it is intended to punish cruelty by those in authority, it equally applies to parents and teachers also. The whole purpose of the Juvenile Justice Act 2000 is to translate the objectives and rights enshrined in Convention on Child Rights which include separation of juveniles in conflict with law from ordinary judicial proceedings to avoid corporal punishment.

Child Battery: The Child battery is one of the serious forms of domestic violence, over which the controls are not specified, in penal systems till Juvenile Justice legislation came in 1986, which is now replaced by Act of 2000. The principles of criminal liability are not totally absent as they could be inferred from different ambiguous provisions prior to these Acts also. This provision should be used to control the child battery at homes and schools.[18]

Hindu Minorities and Guardianship Act protect the minors, their person and property. They are protected under the guardianship of parents (natural guardians) or legal guardians of children born or adopted. Guardianship, custody of children and adoption has fallen under the domain of Personal Laws, but it has such harrowing implications for the children and young persons.

In any divorce proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act the court has to decide on the maintenance, custody and education of the minor child. Custody of a child below five years is generally given to the mother. But in dealing with this, the court has the right to change, suspend or revoke its earlier orders. The child's welfare is of primary consideration. [19]

Child marriage is widespread in India despite a law banning it. Law - The Child Marriage Restraint Act (CMRA) - was introduced in 1929. In fact, the Indian political class woke up to the reality when Census 1921 reported that there were 600 brides between the ages of one and 12 months. It is said that a shocked Mahatma Gandhi urged a member of the Central Legislative Council, Harbilas Sarda, to introduce a Bill restraining child marriages. Thus was born the CMRA, popularly known as the Sarda Act. It was amended in 1978, when the minimum age of marriage was fixed at 21 for boys and 18 for girls and offences under the Act were made cognizable. The provisions of the Act are only to restrain and not to invalidate such marriages[20]

Child slavery and child labour is restrained by The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986 , which has been passed to adopt all the international principles as regards child labour, the Act is an important legislation, which has helped in restricting the evil of child labour to its minimal.

WOMAN AND LAW: Violence affects the lives of millions of women worldwide, in all socio-economic and educational classes. It cuts across cultural and religious barriers, impeding the right of women to participate fully in society. Violence against women takes a dismaying variety of forms, from domestic abuse and rape to child marriages and female circumcision. All are violations of the most fundamental human rights.[21] Some

females fall prey to violence before they are born, when expectant parents abort their unborn daughters, hoping for sons instead. In other societies, girls are subjected to such traditional practices as circumcision, which leave them maimed and traumatized. In others, they are compelled to marry at an early age, before they are physically, mentally or emotionally mature.[22] Women are victims of incest, rape and domestic violence that often lead to trauma, physical handicap or death. The violence against women are dowry-related violence (498a IPC) and early marriage, sexual assault within marriage, sexual harassment in the workplace is a growing concern for women, Many women are forced into prostitution, Most women initially victimized by sexual traffickers, custodial violence, violence against migrant workers, refugee and displaced women and women in situations of armed conflict, violence perpetrated or condoned by States, pornography. In recent years India has taken significant steps towards improving laws relating to violence against women. For example. The offences find mention in many enactments. These under- mentioned provisions are enumerated in Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 304-B -dowry deathSection 354 --Assault or criminal force to woman, Section 361 -kidnapping from lawful guardianship, Section 366 --kidnapping, abducting or inducing a woman, Section 372 -selling minor for purposes of prostitution, Section 376 -rape, Section 376-A- intercourse by a man with his wife during separation, Section 376-B -intercourse by public servant with woman in his custody, Section 376-D - intercourse by any member of the hospital with any woman in that hospital, Section 494-remarriage, Section 498 - enticing or taking away or detain a married woman, Section 498-A - dowry cruelty[23]

The domestic violence act, 2005 is a comprehensive law and addresses all issues related to women. It is for the first time that an act has been made to address women's issues in such detail. The Act is an extremely progressive one not only because it recognizes women who are in a live in relationship but also extends protection to other women in the household, including sisters and mothers thus the Act includes relations of consanguinity, marriage, or through relationships in the nature of marriage, adoption, or joint family thus, ' domestic relationships' are not restricted to the marital context alone. In fact the Act has given a new dimension to the word abuse because unlike the primitive notion abuse includes actual abuse or threat of abuse, whether physical, sexual, verbal, economic and harassment by way of dowry demands.[24] The recent Domestic Violence Act has broadly defined domestic relationship to protect not only wives but also women living in relationships in the nature of marriage. But the provision for maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure, as it stands today, does not cover such women.

PROPERTY RIGHTS: property ownership, land registration, and other related inheritance rights are the rights related to property are dealt under The Transfer of Property Act. Insecure property rights are major impediments to economic growth and development. Without land titles, real property owners are often unable to use their assets to their fullest potential. It is a necessary prerequisite to implement a system of secure property rights. Recording and documenting property transactions, including inheritance rights, require a reliable means to establish identity and familial relationships. Birth and civil registration systems could serve this purpose, thus legal identity is a necessary prerequisite to implement a system of secure property rights. Hindu succession Act takes

care of Hindu joint family property.[25] The Act has been amended in 2005 recognizing women as coparceners. When there is dispute between husband and wife, the court makes provision with respect to the property which is gifted at or about the time of marriage, and belongs to both husband and wife.

MARRIAGE: During the life cycle of a human being the most crucial phase is married life. Which introduce oneself with all the major responsibilities and chores since the time of birth until death. Social Life educates about the need of performing duties and regulatory principles, which is substantial to systemize the life of a humans. The two purposes of marriage are: the mutual support, both spiritual and material, of man and wife; and bring children into the world. Marriage is a religious sacrament, a human contract and a civil institution. It is a spiritual union.[26]

Through a marriage, a man and a woman each fulfill their dharma, becoming physically, emotionally and spiritually complete. He needs her tenderness, companionship and encouragement, while she needs his strength, love and understanding. Their union results in the birth of children and the perpetuation of the human race. the growing number of divorce cases, cases regarding custody of children and maintenance, polygamy, and dowry deaths reveal that marriage is no longer considered as a divine union by the society. Hence let us not be under the illusion that this law would violate the sacredness of marriage rites. Hindu marriage by the way is still recognized as a sacramental union sanctioned by the gods; child marriage is not permitted. Special Marriage Act of 1956, amended 1976, has changed its former incarnation since 1872. Indian Succession Act both improved for Hindus and made things more difficult for mixed marriages, or where the Hindu or another caste partner converts to the religion of the other partner, say Christianity, it is more in favor of women than men converting. There are nonetheless a number of glaring weaknesses but these are being dealt with piecemeal, while these Acts do not recognize bigamy. [27]These laws govern all Indians who are not Muslims.

In contrast to Hindu Law, Muslim Personal law has not been reformed to that extent. Muslims have the protection of their personal law, which has socially (not necessarily legally) binding jurisdiction over the Muslim persons. Unless Muslims choose otherwise, they are governed for all family related matters by the broadly Shari at and narrowly rulings of the representative jurists in their local areas.[28] As it is, any Indian citizen who opts to marry under the Special Marriage Act of 1954 automatically has the marriage registered by the marriage officers who has been specially appointed for the purpose. The marriage registered under this Act is easier to prove. The mere certificate is proof of marriage. The certificate is accepted by all government and semi government authorities including passport and emigration authorities. Mutual consent divorce can be obtained. The marriage registered under this Act is easier to prove. The mere certificate is proof of marriage. The certificate is accepted by all government and semi government authorities including passport and emigration authorities. Mutual consent divorce can be obtained.

Sometimes, a woman realizes that her marriage is not valid only after her husband deserts her and refuses alimony. In such cases, she has to prove that her marriage was valid and legal under the personal law by which they were governed.

RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS: Section 9[29] of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 embodies the concept of restitution of conjugal rights under which after solemnization of marriage if one of the spouses abandons the other, the aggrieved party has a legal right to file a petition in the matrimonial court for restitution of conjugal rights. This right can be granted to any of the spouse. The prime objective of section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act is to preserve the marriage.

The constitutional validity of the provision has time and again been questioned and challenged. The earliest being in 1983 before the Andhra Pradesh High Court [30] where the Hon'ble High Court held that the impugned section was unconstitutional. The Delhi High Court in Harvinder Kaur v Harminder Singh [31] though had non-conforming views. Ultimately Supreme Court in Saroj Rani v. Sudharshan Kumar Chadha [32] gave a judgment which was in line with the Delhi High Court[33] views and upheld the constitutional validity of the section 9 and over-ruled the decision given in T. Sareetha v. T. Venkatasubbaiah .[34]

DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE: Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 for the first time introduced a provision for divorce among the Hindus. These are on the grounds of - adultery, cruelty, desertion for a continuous period of two years, one of the party ceasing to be a Hindu by conversion, unsound mind, suffering from incurable leprosy, venereal diseases or by taking to religious order and renouncing the world or, if either party disappears for a period of seven years. These grounds can be urged by the suffering party in a court of law and justice obtained. This has enabled many a woman to find a way out of a bad marriage. Subsequent to the act being passed in 1955 an amendment was added for obtaining divorce by mutual consent. This was quite a godsend as now the couple can avoid contest on any issue.[35]

The Parliament passed the bill in May 1986. Thus The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights in Divorce) Act effectively struck down the Supreme Court's judgment, reinstating the legitimacy of the Personal Law under the Shariat Act, 1937. It decreed that section 125 of the CPC does not apply to the divorced Muslim woman. Her former husband is only obliged to return the mehr (dowry, or marriage settlement) and pay her maintenance during the period of iddat. With that also went into abeyance the very astute observation registering a telos, indeed a long-anticipated signal to the Legislature, to institute the requirements of the Directive Principles. The Muslim Women Protection Act has been challenged as violating the right to gender equality, but is still pending for consideration by the Supreme Court. The courts emphasized the need for common civil law. [36]

In addition to the divorce in the Hindu Marriage Act and the special Marriage Act, two of the most important ones - irretrievable breakdown of marriage and mutual consent - will now be incorporated in the Indian Divorce Act. Usually a divorce by mutual consent is granted within 8-9 months. If contested then it depends on the number of

witnesses and evidence and would extend from 3-4 years.  A recent development in the divorce law is that if both husband and wife have ruled out any form of compromise and have firmly decided to part ways, then the mandatory six month waiting period is waived and they are granted divorce immediately. If one of the couple is outside the country, then he/she could present the case through his/her advocate. But both have to be present at the time of filing the case, counseling and evidence stage. Otherwise, the ex-parte decree will be granted to the other person.[37]

Marriage after Divorce: After divorce either party can marry another person. In all cases, no petition can be filed in a court of law within one year of marriage.

MAINTANANCE: The Hindu wife is entitled to be maintained by the husband during her lifetime. She is entitled to live separately from her husband without giving up her claim to maintenance under certain under conditions. She shall not be entitled to separate residence and maintenance if she converts or is proven unchaste. This is governed by the Hindu Maintenance Act of 1956. This is an absolute right given to the Hindu wife. In divorce proceedings the wife is entitled to claim interim relief before the court decides on permanent relief of maintenance. The Court will consider whether a wife is entitled to maintenance if her earnings are enough to maintain her. The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.Maintenance, in other words, is right to livelihood when one is incapable of sustaining oneself. Hindu law, one of the most ancient systems of law, recognizes right of any dependent person including wife, children, aged parents and widowed daughter or daughter in law to maintenance. The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, provides for this right.[38]

OLD AGE: A draft bill in Parliament attempts to mandate the care of elderly citizens in law, and envisions the establishment of tribunals to ensure its functioning. The purpose of the Bill is to secure financial stability for parents who are unable to maintain themselves. The Constitution through its Directive Principles directs the State, not private citizens, to make effective provision for maintenance of senior citizens. Constitution of India, Directive Principles Article 41 states that The State shall, within the limits of its economic capacity and development, make effective provision for…old age, sickness and disablement, and in other cases of undeserved want.” Two Acts - the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 - currently mandate the care of parents by their children if they are unable to take care of themselves. Code of Criminal Procedure (Chapter IX, Section 125(1)(2)) Requires persons who have sufficient means to take care of his or her parents if they are unable to take care of themselves. Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 Requires Hindu sons and daughters to maintain their elderly parents when parents are unable to maintain themselves. In this Bill too, the onus has been placed on children and relatives of senior citizens. Additionally, while the Bill allows state governments to establish old age homes, it does not make it mandatory. Also, this Bill does not address the needs of senior citizens who do not have either children or property.[39] In India, existing schemes for old age pension include the Employees' Provident Fund and the New Pension Scheme, which cover roughly 13% of the working population

(10% as government servants and 3% from the formal private sector). In addition, the National Old Age Pension Scheme provides for destitute persons of 65 years and above.

DEATH: End of life is determined by death certificate. The death certificate indicates the nonexistence of a person. Death certificate is necessarily registered for legal identity. All insurance and other benefits are claimed by providing death certificate.

PERSONAL LAWS AND FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS:

Any law in force at the time of coming into force of the Constitution of India or enacted after that which is in conflict with the chapter on fundamental rights will be void to that extent. In particular, if personal laws are covered by Articles 13 and 372 of the Constitution, they will be void to the extent that they are in contravention of Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution. Article 14 guarantees equality before law and equal protection of laws. Article 15 prescribes that no law can discriminate only on the grounds of sex, caste, etc. Article 21 is the fundamental right of life and personal liberty. Any personal law which discriminates against women would by its very nature be unequal and discriminatory and be on the face of it be in violation of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, would also be in violation of the expanded meaning of right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and to that extent be void.

The principle is simple and does not require much explanation. Any personal law which is challenged, if found discriminatory against women should have been struck down by the Courts. Women not being natural guardians, Talaq, polygamy, absence of coparcenary rights for women under Hindu undivided family, etc. should all have been declared as void by now as they all discriminate against women. But surprisingly that has not happened. [40]

Over the years, the Supreme Court has taken differing views while dealing with personal laws. In a number of cases it has held that personal laws of parties are not susceptible to Part III of the Constitution dealing with fundamental rights. Therefore they cannot be challenged as being in violation of fundamental rights especially those guaranteed under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India. On the other hand, in a number of other cases the Supreme Court has tested personal laws on the touchstone of fundamental rights and read down these laws or interpreted them so as to make them consistent with fundamental rights. There is however, no uniformity of decisions as to whether personal laws can be challenged on the touchstone of fundamental rights i.e. whether they are "laws" or "laws in force" under Article 13 of the Constitution of India. The following decisions hold that they cannot be so challenged:

All these cases have effectively held that personal laws, whether codified or uncodified, whether in force at the time of coming into force of the Constitution or enacted thereafter, are not susceptible to the Chapter on fundamental rights and cannot be voided on the touchstone of Part III of the Constitution. However, a three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in the Mudaliar case [41] has taken a contrary view and has held that personal laws to the extent that they are in violation of the fundamental rights are void.

In most of the personal law cases the Supreme Court refused of to interfere. In Krishna Singh v. Mathura Ahir[42] a two judge Bench of the Supreme Court was considering weather a shudra could become a sanyasi. While holding that if the custom and usage permitted he could so become, the Court held that in the absence of such usage or custom he could not be so ordained. The High Court had held that any handicap suffered by a Shudra according to the personal law would be in violation of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution. In this case curiously there is no discussion whatsoever as to why Part III of the Constitution does not touch upon the personal laws of the parties. Personal laws are as much laws as any other laws. Just because they may be derived (at least at times) from some religion or the other they do not cease to be laws. In fact much of what passes as personal law does not even have any basis in religion.

In Maharshi Avdhesh v. Union of India [43] the Petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking (a) enactment of the Uniform Civil Code; (b) for a declaration that Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 was void as being in violation of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution and (c) For a direction against the Respondents from enforcing the Shariat Act. The Petition was dismissed by a two-judge Bench of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that even codified personal law cannot be tested on the touchstone of fundamental rights. Of course subsequently in the case of Daniel Latifi, the Supreme Court did test the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 on the touchstone of fundamental rights.

The third and latest decision on this issue is a decision of a three judge Bench given in Ahmedabad Women Action Group & Ors. v. Union of India [44]. Different organizations had challenged through various Petitions a number of discriminatory aspects of personal laws - both codified and uncodified across religions. The Court, relying on the earlier decisions held that the matters pertained to legislative action and the Court could not interfere. Again, in this case no independent reasons were given as to why personal laws could not be susceptible to Part 3 of the Constitution.[45 ]

Daniel Latifi v. Union of India [46]A Constitutional Bench of this Court gave a categorical finding that in view of their interpretation of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 the provisions of this Act were not in violation of Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution. In the case of N. Adithyan v. Travancore Devaswom Board & Ors. [47] the Supreme Court was concerned with the issue whether in respect of certain temple in Kerala only Brahmins could be ordained as priests. Longstanding usage and custom was cited in support of this claim. The Court negatived the plea and observed:

"Any custom or usage irrespective of even any proof of their existence in pre constitutional days cannot be countenanced as a source of law to claim any rights when it is found to violate human rights, dignity, social equality and the specific mandate of the Constitution and law made by Parliament. No usage which is found to be pernicious and considered to be in derogation of the law of the land or opposed to public policy or social decency can be accepted or upheld by courts in the country."

In John Vallamattom v. Union of India [48]a three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court was considering the Constitutional validity of S. 118 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, a pre Constitutional personal law applicable essentially to Christians and Parsis. In light of Ahmedabad Women's Action Group (Supra) and other Judgments, the Supreme Court could have very easily dismissed the matter by simply holding that this law, being a personal law and being a pre Constitutional law was not "law in force" as per Article 13 of the Constitution of India and thus not susceptible to challenges on grounds of violation of fundamental rights. But instead, the Court went into its Constitutional validity and struck it down as being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. To begin with, the Court held,

"It is neither in doubt nor in dispute that clause (1) of Article 13 of the Constitution of India in no uncertain terms states that all laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of the Constitution, in so far as they are inconsistent with the provisions of Parts III thereof shall to the extent of such inconsistency be void. Keeping in view the fact that the Act is a pre Constitution enactment, the question as regards its Constitutionality will, therefore have to be judged as being law in force at the commencement of the Constitution of India. By reason of clause (1) of Article 13 of the Constitution of India perforce does not make a pre Constitution statutory provision constitutional. It merely makes a provision for the applicability and enforceability of pre constitution laws subject of course to the provisions of the Constitution and until they are altered, repealed or amended by a competent legislature or other competent authorities."

In this matter the Court even went further and held:

"In any view of the matter even if a provision was not unconstitutional on the day on which it was enacted or the Constitution came into force, by reason of facts emerging out thereafter, the same may be rendered unconstitutional. The world has witnessed a sea change. The right of equality of women vis a vis their male counterparts is accepted worldwide. It will be immoral to discriminate a woman on the ground of sex. It is forbidden both in our domestic law as also in international law." " It is no matter of doubt that marriage, succession and the like matters of a secular character cannot be brought within the guarantee enshrined under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. Any legislation that brings succession and the like matters of secular character within the ambit of Articles 25 and 26 is a suspect legislation....."

On the one hand the Supreme Court has held that personal laws are not susceptible to provisions of Part III of the Constitution, on the other hand the Supreme Court has tested these very personal laws on the touchstone of fundamental rights and at times even struck them down. The strongest indicator of this is the case of Masilamani Mudaliar v. Idol of Sri Swaminathaswami Thirukoil [49] the observations of the three judges Bench are worth reproducing extensively:

"The basic structure permeates equality of status and opportunity. The personal laws’ conferring inferior status on women is anathema to equality. Personal laws are derived

not from the Constitution but from the religious scriptures. The laws thus derived must be consistent with the Constitution lest they become void under Article 13 if they violate fundamental rights.

"Article 15 (3) of the Constitution of India positively protects such Acts or actions. Article 21 of the Constitution of India reinforces “right to life". Equality dignity of person and right to development are inherent rights in every human being. Life in is expanded horizon includes all that give meaning to a person's life including culture, heritage and tradition with dignity of person. The fulfillment of that heritage in full measure would encompass the right to life. For its meaningfulness and purpose every woman is entitled to elimination of obstacles and discrimination based on gender for human development. Women are entitled to enjoy economic, social, cultural and political rights without discrimination and on a footing of equality. Equally in order to effectuate fundamental duty to develop scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of enquiry and to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activities as enjoined in Articles 51-A (h) (j) of the Constitution of India, facilities and opportunities not only are to be provided for, but also for all forms of gender-based discrimination should be eliminated.

"But the right to equality, removing handicaps and discrimination against a Hindu female by reason of operation of existing law should be in conformity with the right to equality enshrined in the Constitution and the personal law also needs to be in conformity with the Constitutional goal." Wittingly or unwittingly, the Supreme Court refused to look into the Constitutional validity of personal laws.

In Narsu Appa Mali case, the Bombay High Court held that personal laws are not susceptible to the Chapter on fundamental rights for the following reasons: - Personal laws are not 'laws' under Articles 13 and 372 of the Constitution - Personal laws are not 'laws in force' under Articles 13 and 372 of the Constitution. But according to some legal experts - a wrong decision was given by Bombay High Court in the case of Narsu Appa Mali. [50]

Personal Laws are Laws because Article 13(3) as well as Article 372 of the Constitution defines "law" to include "any Ordinance, order, by law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law". "Personal laws" include both codified and uncodified laws. To the extent that personal laws include codified laws there cannot be any dispute that such laws are "laws" under Articles 13 and 372. Whether before or after the Constitution, such laws have been enacted by the then existing sovereign and they continue to be in force even on the change of the sovereign unless they are repealed or treated as void under Articles 13 of the Constitution.

. In a case [51] the Supreme Court held that even the enacted Hindu Laws including the four laws passed during 1955-56 were part of the personal laws. Personal laws are laws as defined under Article 13 of the Constitution. In another case [52] the Supreme Court has observed that "though theorists may not find it easy to define a law" "the main features and characteristics of law are well recognized" and that "stated broadly, a law

generally is a body of rules which have been laid down for determining legal rights and legal obligations which are recognized by courts."

Even in respect of customary laws, in the case of Sant Ram[53] a Constitutional Bench of this Court observed: "The reasons given by the Supreme Court to hold statute law void apply equally to a custom. Custom as such is affected by Part III of the Constitution dealing with fundamental rights..." In the same case the court further observed: "Custom and usage having in the territory of India the force of the law must be held to be contemplated by the expression "all laws in force."

Personal Laws as Laws in Force: Once personal laws are recognized as "laws" under Article 13 of the Constitution of India at least those codified laws which have come into existence after 1950 would in any way be subject to fundamental rights like any other law. The only other question would be regarding those personal laws which have existed prior to the coming into force of the Constitution. If personal laws are 'laws' as commonly defined there is no justification for treating them as not "laws in force" merely because they were in existence at the time of coming into force of the Constitution.

Prior to the enactment of the Constitution Hindus were governed by their own personal law and so was the case with Muslims, Christians, Parsis and certain other communities. These laws were essentially based on customs and usage and were recognized as such by the courts in India as having force of law. The rights and obligations enforceable in Court of law were derived from these personal laws and in matters of family disputes the court essentially took cognizance of only the personal laws of the parties.[54]

Thus for all practical purposes these laws were laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of this constitution. Consequently to the extent that they were inconsistent with the provisions of Part III of the Constitution they were to be treated as void.

FAMILY LAWS- ROLE OF JUDICIARY:

In countries of the Civil Law group three areas of status, assets, and business may be dealt with in separate codes of Family Law, Civil Law (using the word in a narrower sense) and Commercial Law. In the common-law world the basic system is laid down by case law, although there are many modern statutes which often re-state and systematize the work of the judges. In India also precedent is followed by judges in deciding case laws.

Personal Laws encourage proliferation, hence conflict and contradiction between different laws on the same set of practices e.g. conjugal relations, succession which result in arbitrariness, relativism and eventually an epidemic of personal laws; because there is no way of checking and redressing certain discriminatory practices within particular communities against some members of their own kind; the very idea of law is vague, non-transparent and slippery between textual roots, customary norms, imported

regulations, etc. Of course, often it is a matter of perspective or relative judgment: the members themselves may not feel they are being marginalized, victimized or compromised in terms of fair and just outcomes in enclosed practices, such as in the case of marriage, divorce, maintenance entitlements and so on, decided by the terms of Personal law enjoyed by that community. Nevertheless, since these are differentially inscribed for different communities under separate Personal Law provisions they have come increasingly into conflict with civil and criminal procedure codes governing the public space. Behind it is the specter of the Indian Penal Code continuing from the last century as well. The Begum Shah Bano case, [55] which erupted in the late 1980's, focused attention on this particular question of personal law, in one area at least. The Supreme Court recognized the obligation of a husband to pay maintenance where the sum from mehr or allowances decreed by custom was insufficient for the estranged wife’s upkeep plus the children she might be caring for. S.125 of Cr Pr Code (recommended 1970) was being invoked. Krishan Iyer observed that the sum paid to Bai Tahira was not enough to keep neither her body in this world nor soul in the next. But this was exploded in the aftermath of the Shah Bano judgment.

Shah Bano was a deserted first wife in her sixties, divorced two years later by triple talaq from her husband after 40 years of marriage. She filed a complaint under S.125 in the district court which increased her awarded amount to 180 rupees a month. Her husband, a lawyer himself, appealed against her move arguing that according to Muslim Personal Law Shah Bano was entitled to maintenance only for the period of Iddat, that is, for three months following divorce. Indirectly the jurisdiction of the CPC was been challenged. Shah Bano had the backing of a Muslim Women's Welfare association and several other activist groups eager to see reform in this particular area. However, the Supreme Court dismissed the husbands appeal, and upheld the High Courts judgment that the CPC was applicable where Personal Law failed to make adequate provisions. Technically, the court was not suggesting that civil code does not apply simpliciter to the case, as would be in order if, say, the case involved corporate theft or willful injury to another person. It was arguing that Personal Law governing the dispositions of the parties in dispute, have been deemed to have failed to provide the redress appropriate to the context. And, one can only suppose that, in the absence of a governing common civil code for all citizens right across the board, or the communal-caste divide, there was no other recourse but to prevail on statutory criminal code to determine and obtain justice in the matter. The ensuing deliberations of the Supreme Court bench are instructive in this regard as the carefully articulated reasoning adds immensely to the on-going debate on the status of Personal Law.

Previously, such disputations had remained confined within court chambers, government bureaucracies, in the communities themselves and the family. There were some stirrings in the 1970s in the attempt by some activists groups to revive the movement towards codification that women groups had argued for way back in the 1930s. But that call also died down. This is rather curious, for a Directive Principle in the Indian Constitution underscored the need to move towards common civil law, and this should itself have provided an incentive for such debates to cut more deeply. [56]

The judges conceded that the Personal Law of the parties should not be supplanted,

especially if the Constitution did protect interests of such religious groups or classes in certain restricted matters. In other words, the court was neither arguing for abolishing Personal Law (i.e. setting aside Personal Law matters pertaining to family and private space) nor the extension of uniform civil codes in this particular matter (which, in any case, the judiciary is not empowered to do under the Directive Principles). What the court was arguing for was simply a deliberative and transformative interpretation of a customary practice which would be consistent with current ethical and moral thinking, and it would also respect certain other provisions and rights made accessible to the citizen in the Constitution (especially in respect of the Articles in Fundamental (Bill of) Rights). Just as the courts are obliged to "interpret" the Constitution (although some judges in the U.S. reject this judicial "intervention"), the courts should be able to interpret Personal Law as well. In a separate case (Hindu man converting to Islam to avail himself of lawful bigamy) the courts again emphasized the need for common civil law. Krishna Iyer, the eminent judge on the bench, made this pertinent plea: At present, we are a distance away from a common Civil Code for all religions, since first things first; let us tackle the job of modernizing the Islamic law first, preserving its genius and great principles but approximating the law to the general system and eventually enriching the latter in many respects

Most marriages are conducted under personal laws or according to religious rites. The Supreme Court has not asked for a common marriage law but wants all marriages to be registered with state authorities. The apex court’s order is based on the reading that the voluntary option regarding registration makes it difficult to enforce laws prohibiting under-age marriage and polygamy. In the absence of proper records, unscrupulous husbands can deny marriage and leave spouses in the lurch on matters of inheritance of property and maintenance. Issues like marriage and divorce can’t be discussed purely in the framework of religious injunctions. They concern civil rights and common laws that codify them are necessary in a modern society. But uniform civil code has always been a contentious issue in India. Ideally, the legislature should take the lead and create a consensus in the society towards a uniform civil code. Its failure to do so has allowed courts to step in and direct the executive to have laws that reduce the influence of social and religious institutions in matters of civil rights. The legislature should take a cue from the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court of India recently while giving judgment in one of case has directed the centre and State governments to frame and notify rules for registration of marriage within three months. It ruled that all marriages, irrespective of their religion, be compulsorily registered and the government should make law accordingly.[57]

Unrivalled in age and continuity, the Hindu law found is contained in a literature which is vast, complex and seemingly impossible to summarize. Its laws and customs are derived from sages of the past who were themselves taught by a creator, it preaches the birth, death and rebirth of living things, and its precepts cover many more activities than does any secular legal system. It governs only the personal and family relations of those involved and its family law has been codified and much amended, especially in India. Nonetheless it can affect the lives of some 450 million people. [58]

Amitava Mukherjee, the first person to be arrested under the new Domestic Violence Act, said he had been happily married for the last 25 years even as he accused the character of the victim. He said that he had kept his wife and family posted about the constant harassment he faced at the hands of the woman who followed him everywhere. After hearing both sides and going through the evidence, the magistrate confirmed that the woman and Mukherjee had a live-in relationship that came under the purview of the Domestic Violence Act. He was found guilty of domestic violence as defined under Section 3 of the Act. In his 11-page order the Judge allowed the compensation to be fixed. The new Act provides for civil liabilities for the man and relief to the woman abused both physically or emotionally during the time they lived together. While this is aimed at guarding the woman against gender vulnerability, some legal experts also believe that it may tilt the balance unfairly against the man as it could open him up to prosecution if he walks out of a soured live-in relationship.[59] Thus Judiciary has played important role in protecting Indian family unit, institution of marriage and other related issues.

CONCLUSION: The Indian parliament has passed various Acts to safeguard the interest’s members in the family and to protect family unit. Joint family norms and customs are changing rapidly. The joint households are adapting to the changing norms and customs. As a reflection of these changes, in the last two decades, the popular media such as cinema and television programmes have often dealt with the changing joint family and households in the modern context. On the whole, the institution of joint family and household is undergoing adaptive changes. Resilience of Indian society and culture is reflected in the institution of the family even today. The spine of controversy revolving around Uniform Civil Code has been secularism and the freedom of religion enumerated in the Constitution of India. The preamble of the Constitution states that India is a "secular democratic republic" This means that there is no State religion. A secular State shall not discriminate against anyone on the ground of religion. A State is only concerned with the relation between man and man. It is not concerned with the relation of man with God. It does not mean allowing all religions to be practiced. It means that religion should not interfere with the mundane life of an individual. citizens belonging to different religions and denominations follow different property and matrimonial laws which is not only an affront to the nation’s unity, but also makes one wonder whether we are a sovereign secular republic or a loose confederation of feudal states, where people live at the whims and fancies of mullahs, bishops and pundits. Progressive law is welcomed but a suitable atmosphere must be created in which all sections feel secure enough to sit together and cull out the most progressive of their personal laws. But this can be answered by an example of Hindu law. When the Hindu Code Bill, which covers Buddhist, Sikhs, Jains as well as different religious denominations of Hindus, was notified, there was a lot of protest. And the then Law Minister, Dr. Ambedkar, had said that for India’s unity, the country needs a codified law. In a similar fashion, the Uniform Civil Code can be implemented, which will cover all the religions, whether major or minor, practiced in India and any person who comes. The Uniform Civil Code should carve a balance between protection of fundamental rights and religious dogmas of individuals. It should be a code, which is just and proper according

to a man of ordinary prudence, without any bias with regards to religious or political considerations. The defense of a full conception of human dignity and the deepest truth of the family are absolutely central and fundamental in order to guarantee respect for the inviolable rights to life and the holiness of marriage, which would be seriously impoverished if the procreative mission in an integral sense were to be disregarded. It is impossible to conceive of the family without taking into account its link with life, or to conceive of life if we neglect its relationship with the family. Thus in India the basic principle protecting Indian Family Frame, the principle that is established in law and in Indian Constitution, the principle that is followed by Indian Judiciary and the principle that is rooted and is innate in the minds of Indians is UNITY IN DIVERSITY AND VASUDAIKA KUTUMBAM.

REFERENCES:

1. Uberoi, Patricia, ed., Family, Kinship And Marriage in India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1994. 2 Shah, A.M., The Family in India : Critical Essays, Orient Longman, New Delhi, 1998. 3. Bhabha, Homi K. (1988) ?Cultural Diversity and Cultural Difference? (excerpted from ?The Commitment to Theory?, New Formations. No 5, pp. 5-23) in The Postcolonial Reader , 1995, Routledge, pp. 206-219. 4.ibid3. 5. Dr. Purushottam Bilimoria, Muslim personal law in India: Colonial Legacy and Current Debates, Deakin University, October 1994.

6. Ammu Abraham,Personal Laws in India, Paper Presented at the Asian Conference on Women, Religion and Family Laws (Bombay: Women's Centre, 1987)  2. 7. Sangari, Kumkum, ?On Personal Law and Uniform Civil Codes Debates in India?, talk at Conference on Religious/Cultural Nationalism and Fundamentalism in South & South-East Asia, Deakin University, October 1994. (Recorded and transcribed? by P Bilimoria), See also (1995), ?Implications of Uniform Civil Code? and ?Uniform Civil Code - An Indian Perspective?. Pamphlet. Bombay: Center for Study of Society and Secularism. June-Aug.8. ibid 5.9. The term “legal identity” is used in two senses: Broadly speaking, legal identity refers to a human being’s legal (as opposed to physical) personality. Construed narrowly, legal identity refers to identity documents that prove one’s status as a person who can exercise rights and demand protection under the laws10. Bernard Rudden, Legal Systems; Legal information Institute, Cornell University Law School, June 2007.11. ibid 10.12. Jayant K. Banthia, A New Born’s First Right, India Together, 7 May 2005.13. United Nations Childrens Fund (UNICEF), Birth Registration:Right from the Start, Innocent Digest No.9- March 2002.14. United Nations Childrens Fund (UNICEF), Abortion, Female Infanticide, Foeticide, Son preference in India.15. 'Goonesekere Savitri, Children Law and Justice, 2000 Edition, Allahabad Law agency.16.Kriti Dwivedi , Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971: An Overview, National Law Institute University.17. Prof. Maadabhushi Sridar, Corporal Punishment: Violation of Child Rights in Schools, National Law School, Hyderabad, See also Mr. Dan O'Donnell, with contributions from Mr. Dan Seymour of UNICEF, Child Protection, A Hand Book for Parliamentarians.18. ibid 17.19. S.A. Desai, Mulla Hindu Law, Vol. 2, 19th Ed., 1987) 20. Asha KrishnaKumar, T.K. Rajalakshmi, Child Brides in India, Frontline, Vol 22- issue 14,Jul 2005 21. V.G. Julie Rajan, An Assessment of Human Rights Violations Against Women in Modern-Day India as a Result of Son Preference, Under Advise of Professors Charlotte Bunch and Lisa Clarke, Center for Women's Global Leadership, New Brunswick. NJ, See also Singh, Indu Prakash. Women, Law and Social Change in India .  New Delhi: Radiant Publishers, 1989. 22. Carol S. Coonrod, Chronic Hunger and the Status of Women in India, June 1998

See also General Assembly,WOM/1594 Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York, Anti- Discrimination Committee urges India to lift Convention Reservations, take steps on behalf of Sexual Violence Victims, Most-Marginalized Women, 18 Jan 2007.23. Raghvendra Singh Raghvendra, Violence against Women, NLIU, Bhopal.24. R.K. Gauba, Domestic Violence Law – A Recipe For Disaster?, The Practical Lawyer, 5 Feb 2008. 25. Paras Diwan, Modern Hindu Law, Allahabad Law Agency, Allahabad, 1992.26. Coutright, Paul and Harlan L (eds.). (1995).? From the Margins of Hindu Marriage: Essays on gender, Religion and Culture. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press27. Paras Diwan, Law of Marriage & Divorce, 4th Ed., p. 328.28. ibid 8.29. Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 reads as follows:- "When either the husband or the wife has without reasonable excuse withdrawn from the society of the other, the aggrieved party may apply, by a petition to the district court, for restitution of conjugal rights and the court, on being satisfied of the truth of the statements made in such petition and that there is no legal ground why the application should not be granted, may decree restitution of conjugal rights accordingly". 30. T. Sareetha v. T. Venkatasubbaiah, A.I.R. 1983 A.P. 356.31. A.I.R. 1984 Del. 66.32. A.I.R. 1984 S.C. 1562.33. Harvinder Kaur v Harminder Singh, A.I.R. 1984 Del. 66.34. A.I.R. 1983 A.P. 356.35. ibid 27.36. Muslim Women Protection of Divorce Act, 1986. Delhi: Eastern Book Co.37. Jaspal Singh, Law of Marriage and Divorce in India , (1983), 38 ibid 25.39.Priya Narayan Parker, PRS LEGIISLATIVE BRIEF( Parents and Senior Citizens Bill)India Together, 05 Feb 2008.40. Mihir Desai, Combat Law, Vol 3, Issue 4, India Together, Feb 2005. 41. Masilamani Mudaliar v. Idol of Sri Swaminathaswami Thirukoil (1996 8 SCC 525)42. (AIR 1980 SC 707) 43. (1994 Supp (1) SCC 713) 44. (1997 3 SCC 573) 45. The Court relied on the following judgments while dismissing the Petitions: Pannalal Pitti v. State of A.P. (1996 2 SCC 498), Madhu Kishwar V. State of Bihar (1996 5 SCC 125), Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India (1999 2 SCC 228),46. (2001 7 SCC 740)47. 2002 8 SCC 10648. (2003 6 SCC 611)49. ibid 41.50. ibid 40. 51. Bajya v. Gopikabai (AIR 1978 SC 793)52. Narsingh Pratap Deo v. State of Orissa (AIR 1964 SC 1793)53. Sant Ram v. Labh Singh (AIR 1965 SC 314)54. ibid 50. 55. Mohammad Ahmad Khan v. Shah Bano Begum,? SCC 2 (1985) Sec. 556. In A.I.R.(The All India Reporter): July 1985, Vol 72 Part 859: pp.945-954.56. ibid 28.57. RamaKrishnan.V, Guide to Indian Laws, Hauser Global Law School program, New York University School of Law, New York, Jan 2006.58. ibid 57.59. Save Indian Society Foundation News, News Articles from my Nation, India- News you can use, Archive for May 23rd 2007, Man to pay Rs. 1.5 lakh to live-in partner.