Family law

In short

Family law (personal law) governs marriage, matrimonial relief, maintenance, adoption, guardianship, custody and succession. In India it is religion-based and not fully codified: Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Parsis and Jews are each governed by their own law, with the Special Marriage Act, 1954 as a secular option, while criminal maintenance under the BNSS applies to all. It is a compulsory paper in every LLB and BA LLB programme, carries high weight in CLAT PG, AIBE, judicial service examinations and the UPSC Law optional, and is bread-and-butter work for litigation chambers, family court practice, matrimonial mediation and NGO legal aid. Interviews test both black-letter sections and leading Supreme Court cases (Shah Bano, Shayara Bano, Vineeta Sharma, Joseph Shine).

Explained

Sources, scheme and the codified Hindu law

• Sources of Hindu law: Shruti, Smriti, commentaries/digests, custom, and modern sources — legislation, judicial precedent and equity. The two schools are Mitakshara (coparcenary, survivorship — all India) and Dayabhaga (Bengal/Assam, no survivorship, succession on death).
• Muslim law sources: Quran, Sunna, Ijma, Qiyas; secondary — custom, legislation, precedent. Sunni (Hanafi) and Shia (Ithna Ashari) schools differ on divorce, wills and inheritance.
• The four 1955–56 Hindu Code Acts: Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA); Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (HSA); Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 (HMGA); Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA). They apply to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs, and to anyone not Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew.
• Secular statutes applying across religions: Special Marriage Act, 1954; Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961; Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA); Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006; Guardians and Wards Act, 1890; Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (secular adoption); Family Courts Act, 1984; maintenance under Section 144 of the BNSS, 2023 (formerly Section 125 CrPC).
• Constitutional frame: personal law is in the Concurrent List (Entry 5, List III); Article 44 directs the State to secure a Uniform Civil Code — a non-enforceable Directive Principle. Uttarakhand's UCC came into force on 27 January 2025; other States have announced committees, so treat the position as evolving.

Marriage: conditions, nullity and matrimonial relief

• Nature: a Hindu marriage is a sacrament yet contractual in requirements; a Muslim marriage (*nikah*) is a civil contract needing offer (*ijab*), acceptance (*qubul*), two witnesses (Sunni) and mahr (dower).
• Section 5 HMA conditions: (i) neither has a living spouse (monogamy); (ii) capacity to consent — no unsoundness of mind, mental disorder unfitting marriage/procreation, or recurrent insanity; (iii) bridegroom 21, bride 18; (iv) not within degrees of prohibited relationship; (v) not sapindas — unless custom permits. Section 7: ceremonies, including saptapadi, where applicable.
• Void marriages (Sec. 11 HMA): breach of clauses (i), (iv), (v) — void *ab initio*, declaration of nullity available. Voidable (Sec. 12): impotence/non-consummation, consent by force or fraud, pre-marriage pregnancy by another, or marriage in breach of consent conditions. Under-age marriage is neither void nor voidable under HMA but is punishable and voidable at the child's option under the PCMA, 2006 (petition within two years of attaining majority).
• Registration: *Seema v. Ashwani Kumar* (2006) directed compulsory registration of all marriages; registration is evidentiary, not constitutive.
• Matrimonial remedies under HMA: restitution of conjugal rights (Sec. 9), judicial separation (Sec. 10), nullity (11, 12), divorce (13), divorce by mutual consent (13-B), plus permanent alimony (25) and custody (26). Section 23 bars relief where the petitioner takes advantage of their own wrong, or where there is connivance, condonation, collusion or unnecessary delay.
• Grounds of divorce (Sec. 13(1)) — available to either spouse: adultery, cruelty, desertion for two years, conversion, unsoundness of mind/mental disorder, virulent and incurable leprosy *(deleted by the Personal Laws (Amendment) Act, 2019)*, venereal disease in communicable form, renunciation of the world, and not heard of for seven years. Section 13(1A): non-compliance with a decree of judicial separation or restitution for one year. Section 13(2) — wife only: pre-Act polygamous marriage; husband guilty of rape, sodomy or bestiality; a maintenance order under Sec. 18 HAMA or Sec. 125 CrPC (now Sec. 144 BNSS) with one year's non-cohabitation; and option of puberty — marriage before 15, repudiated before 18.
• Mutual consent (Sec. 13-B): living separately for one year or more, mutual agreement, two motions six to eighteen months apart. In *Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur* (2017) the Court held the six-month gap waivable; in *Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan* (2023) a Constitution Bench held it can dissolve a marriage on irretrievable breakdown directly under Article 142. Irretrievable breakdown is still not a statutory ground.
• Cruelty covers mental as well as physical cruelty (*Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh*, 2007 — illustrative list: sustained abusive conduct, unilateral refusal of sex, refusal to have children, false allegations). Desertion needs *factum deserendi* + *animus deserendi* without reasonable cause or consent.
• Muslim divorce: by husband — *talaq-e-ahsan* (one pronouncement in a *tuhr* + iddat), *talaq-e-hasan* (three in three *tuhrs*), *ila*, *zihar*; by wife — *talaq-e-tafweez* (delegated), and khula (at wife's instance with consideration) or mubarat (mutual) by agreement. Talaq-e-biddat (triple talaq) was held void in *Shayara Bano v. Union of India* (2017) and criminalised by the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 — up to three years' imprisonment, cognizable only on the wife's or a blood relative's complaint, bailable at the magistrate's discretion. A Muslim wife may also sue for dissolution on nine grounds under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 (whereabouts unknown four years, failure to maintain two years, imprisonment seven years, impotence, cruelty, option of puberty, etc.).
• Other communities: Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (Christians — Sec. 10 grounds, Sec. 10A mutual consent after two years' separation); Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936 (tried before a Parsi Matrimonial Court with delegates).
• Special Marriage Act, 1954: civil marriage irrespective of religion — 30 days' public notice, objections, registration before a Marriage Officer; succession then normally follows the Indian Succession Act, 1925. In *Supriyo v. Union of India* (2023) the Supreme Court declined to read same-sex marriage into the SMA, leaving it to Parliament.

Maintenance and matrimonial economics

• Section 144 BNSS, 2023 (earlier Sec. 125 CrPC): a secular, summary remedy against a person with sufficient means who neglects a wife unable to maintain herself (including a divorced wife until remarriage), legitimate or illegitimate minor child, a major child unable to maintain itself by reason of physical or mental abnormality, and parents unable to maintain themselves. The former ceiling on the monthly amount was removed in 2001; the court may order interim maintenance and must ordinarily dispose of the application within 60 days.
• A wife living in adultery, or refusing to live with the husband without sufficient reason, or living separately by mutual consent is disentitled; a husband's remarriage or keeping a mistress is "just ground" for her to live apart.
• Shah Bano (Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, 1985) applied Sec. 125 CrPC to a divorced Muslim woman; Parliament's Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 confined the husband's duty to the *iddat* period but Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001) read it to require a fair and reasonable provision for her future. *Shabana Bano* (2010) and Mohd. Abdul Samad v. State of Telangana (2024) confirm that a divorced Muslim woman may claim under the CrPC/BNSS provision in addition to the 1986 Act.
• Civil maintenance: HAMA Secs. 18 (wife, including when living separately for enumerated causes), 19 (widowed daughter-in-law), 20 (children and aged parents), 21–22 (dependants out of the estate); HMA Sec. 24 (interim maintenance and litigation expenses, available to either spouse) and Sec. 25 (permanent alimony — gross sum or periodic, variable or rescindable on remarriage/unchastity). Muslim law: the wife's mahr is a debt on the estate; a divorced wife's maintenance is for *iddat* plus fair provision.
• Quantification: no statutory formula. *Rajnesh v. Neha* (2020) mandated a standard affidavit of assets and liabilities, laid down criteria (status of parties, reasonable needs, income and liabilities, the wife's qualifications and earning capacity, child's education) and held maintenance payable from the date of application, with a norm of avoiding overlapping awards under different statutes. The one-fourth to one-third of net income range is a judicial rule of thumb, not a rule of law.
• Streedhan and dowry: streedhan is the woman's absolute property (*Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar*, 1985 — the husband is a trustee); dowry demand is punishable under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, and the cruelty/dowry-death offences now sit in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (dowry death carrying a minimum of seven years, with the presumption in Sec. 118 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023).
• PWDVA, 2005 — civil in nature: "domestic violence" covers physical, sexual, verbal, emotional and economic abuse; an aggrieved woman in a domestic relationship (including a relationship in the nature of marriage) may obtain protection, residence, monetary relief, custody and compensation orders from a Magistrate, with Protection Officers and service providers assisting; breach of a protection order is an offence. *Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Harsora* (2016) struck down "adult male" so respondents may include female relatives.

Adoption, guardianship and custody

• HAMA adoption (Secs. 6–17): the taker must be of sound mind, major and a Hindu; a male needs his wife's consent (unless she has renounced, converted or been judicially declared of unsound mind), a female can adopt in her own right (*post-1956 position, widened by the 2010 amendment*). One may not adopt a second child of the same sex already living in the family; a 21-year age gap is required where the adopter and adoptee are of opposite sexes; the child must be under 15 and unmarried unless custom allows. Adoption, once valid, is irrevocable and the child is transplanted into the adoptive family (the doctrine of relation back is largely abolished — Sec. 12 preserves vested property).
• JJ Act, 2015 (with the 2021 amendment): secular adoption of orphaned, abandoned and surrendered children through CARA and its guidelines; after the 2021 amendment adoption orders are passed by the District Magistrate, not the civil court, with appeal to the Divisional Commissioner. Muslim, Christian and Parsi law does not recognise full adoption; guardianship (*kafala*-like) or the JJ Act route is used.
• Natural guardians (Sec. 6 HMGA): for a Hindu minor boy/unmarried girl — father, and after him the mother; for a child below five, custody ordinarily with the mother; for an illegitimate child — mother, then father; for a married minor girl — husband. *Githa Hariharan v. RBI* (1999) read "after" to mean "in the absence of", allowing the mother to act as natural guardian; *ABC v. State (NCT of Delhi)* (2015) allowed an unwed mother to be sole guardian without naming the father.
• Guardians and Wards Act, 1890: secular machinery — the District Court appoints a guardian of person or property, governed by the welfare of the minor as paramount (Sec. 17); guardians of property need court permission to alienate immovable property.
• Custody principles: welfare of the child is paramount, not the parent's right; types — physical, joint, legal, visitation; the child's preference is relevant with age and understanding. *Gaurav Nagpal v. Sumedha Nagpal* (2008) — welfare overrides even a party's contempt; *Yashita Sahu v. State of Rajasthan* (2020) recognised virtual visitation. In Muslim law *hizanat* gives the mother custody of a young child while the father remains the *wali* (natural guardian).

Succession and property rights

• HSA, 1956 as amended in 2005: Section 6 makes a daughter a coparcener by birth, with the same rights and liabilities as a son; the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 also abolished survivorship for deaths after 9 September 2005 (notional partition and testamentary/intestate succession apply) and deleted Sec. 23 (dwelling-house restriction) and Sec. 24.
• *Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma* (2020) settled that the daughter's coparcenary right is by birth — the father need not have been alive on 9 September 2005 — overruling *Prakash v. Phulavati* and approving *Danamma*; registered partitions or decreed partitions before that date are protected.
• Intestate succession to a Hindu male (Secs. 8–13): Class I heirs (son, daughter, widow, mother, and specified descendants of predeceased children — all take simultaneously and equally, mother included); failing them, Class II (in order of entries, I to IX); then agnates, then cognates. Rules of distribution: Sec. 10 (per capita among Class I branches, per stirpes down a branch), Secs. 18–19 (full blood preferred, heirs take as tenants-in-common).
• Hindu female's property (Secs. 14–16): Sec. 14(1) converts property possessed by a female into her absolute property (the *Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act* limited estate is gone); on her intestacy her own heirs take first (husband and children), then husband's heirs, then her father's and mother's heirs — with a special rule for property inherited from parents or from the husband/father-in-law (Sec. 15(2)).
• Disqualifications: murderer of the deceased (Sec. 25), convert's descendants (Sec. 26); remarriage of a widow in certain cases; disease, defect or deformity does not disqualify (Sec. 28).
• Muslim inheritance: no birthright — the estate vests only on death, after funeral expenses, debts and legacies; heirs are sharers (Quranic — 12 under Hanafi law) and residuaries (*asabah*), with distant kindred thereafter. A son takes double a daughter's share; the widow takes 1/8 with children and 1/4 without; the husband 1/4 with children and 1/2 without. Heirs take per capita in a defined share and liability for debts is proportionate and several. A will (*wasiyat*) is valid only up to one-third of the net estate and, beyond that or in favour of an heir, needs the other heirs' consent.
• Other systems: Christians and Parsis are governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (Christians: Secs. 31–49 — widow one-third with lineal descendants; Parsis: Secs. 50–56). Goa follows a Portuguese-derived civil code with community of property. Agricultural land devolution can be governed by State tenancy laws.

Procedure, forum and reform

• Family Courts Act, 1984: State Governments must set up Family Courts in towns above one million population; proceedings are informal, in camera where needed, with a duty to attempt settlement and conciliation first; legal practitioners have no right to appear as of right (Sec. 13 — in practice courts permit them); appeal lies to the High Court within 30 days.
• Jurisdiction under HMA Sec. 19: place of marriage, where the respondent resides, where the parties last resided together, or where the petitioner resides if the respondent is outside India or not heard of. Divorce petitions are tried as suits under the CPC (Sec. 21 HMA).
• Mediation and ADR: Sec. 89 CPC and court-annexed mediation centres; the Mediation Act, 2023 encourages pre-litigation mediation, though matrimonial disputes may be mediated and the resulting settlement recorded. Lok Adalats and Legal Services Authorities handle maintenance compromises.
• Live-in relationships: not a marriage, but a long cohabitation raising a presumption of marriage (Sec. 119 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — earlier Sec. 114 Evidence Act); *D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal* (2010) set tests for a "relationship in the nature of marriage" under PWDVA; children of a void/voidable marriage are legitimate (Sec. 16 HMA) and *Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun* (2023) held they inherit the parents' own and separate share.
• Decriminalisation and restatement: adultery as a crime was struck down in *Joseph Shine v. Union of India* (2018) (still a matrimonial ground); *Navtej Singh Johar* (2018) read down Sec. 377. Restitution of conjugal rights (Sec. 9 HMA) is under constitutional challenge for infringing privacy and autonomy; its validity was upheld in *Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar* (1984), so the law stands but may change.
• Pending reform: irretrievable breakdown as a statutory ground (Law Commission Reports 71 and 217), a uniform marriageable age of 21 for women (Bill of 2021, not enacted), and a nationwide UCC remain unlegislated — present these as proposals, not law.

Key points

• Personal law - religion-specific law of marriage, divorce, maintenance, adoption and succession; Article 44 UCC is a Directive Principle, with Uttarakhand's UCC in force since 27 January 2025.
• Sec. 5 HMA - monogamy, sound mind, 21/18 ages, no prohibited relationship or sapinda relation except by custom.
• Void vs voidable - void *ab initio* for bigamy/prohibited/sapinda (Sec. 11); voidable for impotence, fraud/force, pre-marriage pregnancy (Sec. 12).
• Sec. 13(1) grounds - adultery, cruelty, desertion (2 years), conversion, unsound mind, venereal disease, renunciation, 7 years' absence; leprosy deleted in 2019.
• Sec. 13(2) wife-only grounds - pre-Act bigamy, husband's rape/sodomy/bestiality, maintenance order with one year's non-cohabitation, option of puberty.
• Sec. 13-B - mutual consent: one year's separation, two motions 6–18 months apart; gap waivable (*Amardeep Singh*), breakdown relief under Art. 142 (*Shilpa Sailesh*).
• Cruelty - includes mental cruelty; *Samar Ghosh* lists illustrations. Desertion = factum + animus + no consent or cause.
• Triple talaq - *talaq-e-biddat* void (*Shayara Bano*, 2017) and an offence under the 2019 Act; *talaq-e-ahsan*/*hasan*, khula, mubarat remain valid.
• Sec. 144 BNSS - secular maintenance for wife, children and parents; no statutory ceiling; interim maintenance, 60-day target disposal.
• Danial Latifi - the 1986 Act requires a Muslim husband to make fair and reasonable provision extending beyond iddat.
• Rajnesh v. Neha - asset-and-liability affidavit, criteria for quantum, maintenance from the date of application, no duplicate awards.
• Sec. 6 HSA (2005) - daughter is a coparcener by birth; *Vineeta Sharma* (2020) - father need not be alive on 9-9-2005.
• Class I heirs - son, daughter, widow, mother and specified issue of predeceased children take simultaneously and equally.
• Sec. 14 HSA - a Hindu female's limited estate becomes absolute property; Sec. 15(2) sends parental/marital-source property back to that source.
• Muslim shares - son : daughter = 2 : 1; widow 1/8 with children, 1/4 without; will valid only to 1/3 without heirs' consent.
• HAMA adoption - wife's consent needed, 21-year gap for opposite-sex adoptions, child under 15, adoption irrevocable; JJ Act 2015 + CARA is the secular route, orders by the District Magistrate after the 2021 amendment.
• Welfare of the child - the paramount test in custody and guardianship; mother ordinarily has custody below 5 (Sec. 6 HMGA).
• PWDVA, 2005 - civil remedies (protection, residence, monetary, custody, compensation) covering economic abuse and live-in relationships.

Formulas and examples

Example 1 — Class I succession. H dies intestate in 2024 leaving self-acquired property of ₹1,20,00,000, a widow W, two sons S1 and S2, one daughter D, his mother M, and a predeceased son P who left a widow and two children.

• Shares at the first level = W + S1 + S2 + D + M + branch of P = 6 shares.
• Each share = 1,20,00,000 / 6 = ₹20,00,000. W, S1, S2, D and M each take ₹20,00,000.
• P's branch takes ₹20,00,000, divided per stirpes among P's widow and two children = 20,00,000 / 3 ≈ ₹6,66,667 each.

Example 2 — Daughter's coparcenary share after *Vineeta Sharma*. A Mitakshara HUF holds ancestral property worth ₹2,40,00,000. Coparceners: father F (died 2010), sons S1, S2 and daughter D; F's widow W is a Class I heir but not a coparcener.

• Notional partition on F's death: sharers at that moment = F, S1, S2, D = 4 → each 1/4 = ₹60,00,000. D's own coparcenary share is ₹60,00,000.
• F's 1/4 (₹60,00,000) devolves by intestate succession among his Class I heirs — W, S1, S2, D = 4 heirs → ₹15,00,000 each.
• Totals: D = 60,00,000 + 15,00,000 = ₹75,00,000; S1 and S2 the same ₹75,00,000 each; W = ₹15,00,000. Check: 75 + 75 + 75 + 15 = ₹2,40,00,000. ✔ D's claim stands because a daughter is a coparcener by birth; after *Vineeta Sharma* it would have survived even had F died before 9 September 2005, there having been no registered partition.

Example 3 — Muslim (Hanafi) distribution. M dies leaving a gross estate of ₹36,00,000, funeral expenses ₹50,000, debts ₹5,50,000, a bequest of ₹12,00,000 to a friend, and heirs: widow, two sons, one daughter.

• Net before legacy = 36,00,000 − 50,000 − 5,50,000 = ₹30,00,000. Bequest valid only to 1/3 = ₹10,00,000, so ₹10,00,000 passes to the friend (the extra ₹2,00,000 lapses without heirs' consent).
• Distributable estate = 30,00,000 − 10,00,000 = ₹20,00,000.
• Widow's share (with children) = 1/8 = ₹2,50,000. Residue = ₹17,50,000 among 2 sons and 1 daughter in 2 : 2 : 1 = 5 parts → one part = ₹3,50,000.
• Each son ₹7,00,000; daughter ₹3,50,000. Check: 2,50,000 + 7,00,000 + 7,00,000 + 3,50,000 = ₹20,00,000. ✔

Example 4 — Maintenance under Sec. 144 BNSS / Sec. 24 HMA. Husband's gross salary ₹90,000 per month; statutory deductions (PF ₹8,000, income tax ₹7,000) = ₹15,000, so net = ₹75,000. Wife is unemployed and has a 6-year-old child; the husband supports his dependent mother.

• Applying *Rajnesh v. Neha*, the court works from net income. A common outcome is roughly one-third for the wife and child together: ₹75,000 / 3 = ₹25,000 per month (for instance ₹15,000 to the wife and ₹10,000 for the child), plus school fees and litigation expenses, payable from the date of the application.
• If arrears accrue for 14 months, arrears = 25,000 × 14 = ₹3,50,000, recoverable as a warrant for levy of fine, with imprisonment up to one month per month's default. If the wife later earns ₹30,000 per month, the award can be varied downwards; an existing PWDVA monetary order would be set off to avoid duplication.

Where it is used

• Matrimonial litigation chambers and Family Courts across every district — divorce, Sec. 13-B petitions, Sec. 144 BNSS maintenance, PWDVA and custody work; the commonest first-brief for a junior litigator.
• Transactional and property practice: title due diligence on ancestral and HUF property, partition deeds, release deeds, succession and legal-heir certificates, probate and letters of administration, and HUF tax planning under the Income-tax Act, 2025.
• In-house, HR and insurance roles: nomination and beneficiary disputes in PF, EPS, gratuity and life policies, which turn on who the legal heirs are under the applicable personal law.
• Mediation and conciliation: empanelled mediators at court-annexed centres and Legal Services Authority Lok Adalats settling maintenance and custody; the Mediation Act, 2023 widens this work.
• Legal aid and NGO practice: DLSA/SLSA panels, One Stop Centres, Protection Officers under the PWDVA, Child Welfare Committees and CARA-recognised adoption agencies.
• Judiciary and policy: Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Family Court judge examinations carry a heavy family-law paper; UCC drafting committees and Law Commission consultations.

Interview questions

• Q: What is the difference between a void and a voidable Hindu marriage? A: A void marriage (Sec. 11 HMA — bigamy, prohibited degrees, sapinda) is no marriage at all and either party may seek a declaration; a voidable marriage (Sec. 12) is valid until annulled at the instance of the aggrieved party on grounds like impotence, fraud, force or pre-marriage pregnancy.
• Q: Is irretrievable breakdown a ground for divorce in India? A: Not a statutory ground; the Supreme Court in *Shilpa Sailesh* (2023) held it can dissolve a marriage on that basis under Article 142, a power only the Supreme Court has.
• Q: Can a divorced Muslim woman claim maintenance beyond the iddat period? A: Yes — *Danial Latifi* (2001) read the 1986 Act to require fair and reasonable provision for her future, and *Mohd. Abdul Samad* (2024) confirmed she may also invoke the secular maintenance provision, now Sec. 144 BNSS.
• Q: What did *Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma* decide? A: That a daughter is a coparcener by birth under the amended Sec. 6 HSA, so her right does not depend on her father being alive on 9 September 2005, and earlier contrary rulings stand overruled.
• Q: Who is a natural guardian of a Hindu minor, and what is the mother's position? A: Under Sec. 6 HMGA the father and after him the mother; *Githa Hariharan* read "after" as "in the absence of", and custody of a child below five ordinarily goes to the mother.
• Q: What is the maximum a Muslim can bequeath by will? A: One-third of the net estate after funeral expenses and debts; anything more, or a bequest to an heir, requires the consent of the other heirs after the testator's death.
• Q: Is triple talaq a crime? A: Yes — the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 makes pronouncing talaq-e-biddat void and punishable with up to three years, after *Shayara Bano* held it unconstitutional.
• Q: Adultery is no longer a crime — can it still end a marriage? A: Yes; *Joseph Shine* (2018) struck down Sec. 497 IPC as a criminal offence but adultery remains a ground for divorce and judicial separation under Sec. 13(1)(i) HMA and other personal laws.
• Q: Difference between judicial separation and divorce? A: Judicial separation suspends the duty to cohabit while the marriage subsists (no remarriage, and reconciliation is possible); divorce dissolves the marriage, and one year's non-compliance with a separation decree is itself a ground under Sec. 13(1A).
• Q: Which law governs adoption by a Christian or Muslim couple in India? A: Their personal law does not recognise full adoption, so they use the secular route under the JJ Act, 2015 through CARA, or seek guardianship under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.
• Q: What factors decide quantum of maintenance? A: *Rajnesh v. Neha* criteria — status of the parties, the claimant's reasonable needs and qualifications, the payer's income and liabilities, number of dependants and the child's education, with disclosure on an assets-and-liabilities affidavit and payment from the date of application.
• Q: Does a woman in a live-in relationship have any remedy? A: Yes — if the relationship is "in the nature of marriage" on the *D. Velusamy* tests she can seek protection, residence and monetary relief under the PWDVA, 2005, and her children are entitled to maintenance and inheritance from their parents.

Common mistakes

• Treating under-age marriage as void under the HMA — it is punishable and voidable at the child's option under the PCMA, 2006, not void.
• Saying a daughter's coparcenary right depends on the father surviving the 2005 amendment — *Vineeta Sharma* settled that it does not.
• Citing Sec. 125 CrPC and old IPC sections — maintenance is now Sec. 144 BNSS, 2023 and the offences sit in the BNS, 2023 and BSA, 2023.
• Confusing mahr with dowry — mahr is the wife's enforceable right and a debt on the estate; dowry is a demand prohibited by the 1961 Act.
• Writing irretrievable breakdown as a statutory ground, or claiming any court can grant it — only the Supreme Court, under Article 142.
• Mixing up void divorce in Muslim law: talaq-e-biddat is void, but ahsan, hasan, khula and mubarat remain valid — and forgetting that the 1939 Act gives the wife judicial grounds.
• Dividing a Class I estate without the per stirpes rule for a predeceased child's branch, or omitting the mother as a Class I heir.

Related topics

Law of contract · Property law and the Transfer of Property Act · Civil procedure · Law of torts · Constitutional law: fundamental rights and Article 44 · Criminal law under the BNS, 2023 and the BNSS, 2023