List of Current Affairs

Source: Supreme Court  

Why in News? 

The Supreme Court of India recently expressed concerns about the misuse of domestic violence and dowry laws, cautioning against their abuse in matrimonial disputes for monetary gains. Addressing alimony, the Court stated that a divorced wife cannot demand permanent alimony to equalize wealth with her ex-husband. While the wife is entitled to maintenance reflecting her standard of life during marriage, the husband’s improved financial status post-divorce cannot justify higher alimony demands. 

What was the Background of Rinku Baheti v. Sandesh Sharda ? 

• The petitioner (wife) and respondent (husband) got married on July 31, 2021, in Pune according to Hindu rites, and it was a second marriage for both parties. 
• The respondent is a US citizen working in IT consultancy, while the petitioner has degrees in Finance, Naturopathy and Yogic Sciences. 
• Marital discord began over issues related to the respondent's involvement with his children from first marriage, ex-wife, and ailing father. 
• Multiple divorce petitions were filed - first under Section 13(1) of Hindu Marriage Act (withdrawn), second by mutual consent (dismissed), and third on grounds of cruelty (contested). 
• The petitioner filed two FIRs in December 2022 - one against respondent's employee and another against respondent and his father alleging various criminal offenses including rape, domestic violence, and IT Act violations. 
• The respondent was arrested at Mumbai airport based on a Look Out Circular and spent nearly a month in custody before getting bail in January 2023. 
• The petitioner filed a transfer petition seeking to move the divorce proceedings from Bhopal to Pune Family Court. 
• The respondent filed an application under Article 142(1) seeking dissolution of marriage on grounds of irretrievable breakdown, claiming the wife demanded large sums of money (initially Rs. 8 crores, later Rs. 25 crores) for mutual consent divorce. 
• The wife contested this, claiming discrimination from husband and in-laws, and alleged pressure from respondent's ex-wife and children were behind his divorce attempts. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Supreme Court held that a divorced wife cannot seek permanent alimony merely to achieve equal wealth status with her ex-husband, expressing serious reservations about the trend of using maintenance claims as a means of wealth equalization. 
• The Court established that while a wife is entitled to maintain her matrimonial lifestyle as far as possible, the husband cannot be perpetually obligated to maintain her according to his evolving financial status post-separation. 
• The Court questioned the inconsistency in maintenance demands, noting that parties seek wealth equalization only when the spouse is financially prosperous, but such claims are notably absent when the spouse's wealth has diminished post-separation. 
• The Bench noted that maintenance law's primary objective is to empower the destitute and achieve social justice and individual dignity, rather than serve as a mechanism for wealth redistribution. 
• The Court clarified that determination of maintenance should be based on multiple factors including the wife's income, reasonable needs, residential rights, and other relevant circumstances, rather than solely on the husband's income or previous settlements. 
• In addressing the specific case, the Court expressed surprise at the petitioner's attempt to seek equalization not only with the respondent but also with his ex-wife's settlement. 
• The Bench noted that alimony disputes typically become the most contentious aspect of marital proceedings, often accompanied by numerous accusations aimed at uncovering the opposing party's assets and income. 
• The Court ultimately determined that maintenance claims must be evaluated based on factors specific to the case at hand, rather than comparative analysis with previous settlements or solely based on the husband's current financial status. 

Legal Framework for Alimony in India Across Different Personal Laws 

• Under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: 
  • Section 24: Provides for interim maintenance during pending proceedings 
  • Section 25: Covers permanent alimony and maintenance after divorce 
  • Applies to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs 
  • Either spouse can claim maintenance 
• Under Special Marriage Act, 1954: 
  • Section 36: Deals with interim maintenance 
  • Section 37: Provides for permanent alimony post-divorce 
  • Applies to inter-religious marriages 
  • Similar provisions to Hindu Marriage Act 
• Under Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (for Christians): 
  • Section 36: Covers interim maintenance 
  • Section 37: Deals with permanent alimony 
  • Courts consider income/property of both spouses 
  • Maintenance during proceedings and after divorce 
• Under Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936: 
  • Section 39: Specifically provides for permanent alimony 
  • Wife can claim maintenance after divorce 
  • Court determines amount based on circumstances 
  • Considers standard of living during marriage 
• Under Muslim Personal Law: 
  • Based on Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 
  • Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 
  • Provides maintenance during iddat period 
  • Based on Islamic principles and Quran 
• Under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: 
  • Section 20: Provides monetary relief 
  • Covers loss of earnings and medical expenses 
  • Includes maintenance for woman and children 
• Under Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: 
  • Section 125: Maintenance order provision 
  • Applies across religions 
  • Provides for wives, children, and parents 
  • Enforceable through criminal proceedings 
• Under Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956: 
  • Section 18: Right of wife to maintenance during marriage 
  • Independent of other proceedings 
  • Specifies grounds for maintenance claims 

How Quantum of Maintenace Decide? 

The quantum of maintenance as per Section 23 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956: 

• For Wife, Children, and Aged/Infirm Parents: 
• The court must consider the position and social status of both parties to ensure maintenance aligns with their standard of living. 
• The reasonable needs and requirements of the claimant are evaluated to determine basic necessities and lifestyle requirements. 
• If the claimant lives separately, the court examines whether such separate living is justified under the circumstances. 
• The court assesses the claimant's existing financial resources including:  
  • Value of owned property 
  • Income from property 
  • Personal earnings 
  • Any other income sources 
• The total number of persons entitled to maintenance under the Act is considered to ensure fair distribution. 
• For Dependents: 
  • The court evaluates the net value of the deceased's estate after accounting for all debts. 
  • Any provisions made for the dependent in the deceased's will are taken into consideration. 
  • The degree of relationship between the dependent and deceased is assessed. 
  • The court considers the dependent's reasonable requirements and needs. 
  • Past relations between the dependent and deceased are evaluated. 
• The dependent's financial position is assessed through:  
  • Value of owned property 
  • Income from property 
  • Personal earnings 
  • Other income sources 
• The total number of dependents entitled to maintenance under the Act is considered for fair distribution. 

What were the Case Laws Referred to by the Court? 

Kiran Jyot Maini v. Anish Pramod Patel, (2024): 

• The Supreme Court established that parties' status is a crucial factor, which includes evaluating their social standing, lifestyle, and financial background. 
• The Court mandated assessment of reasonable needs of wife and dependent children, covering essential expenses like food, clothing, shelter, education, and medical care. 
• The Court held that the wife's educational and professional qualifications, along with employment history, must be considered to evaluate potential self-sufficiency. 
• Justice Vikram Nath emphasized that any independent income or property owned by the wife should be factored in to determine if it's sufficient to maintain the marital standard of living. 
• The Court recognized that sacrifice of employment opportunities for family responsibilities (child-rearing, elder care) affecting career prospects must be given due consideration. 

Rajnesh v. Neha, (2021): 

• The Supreme Court explicitly stated there is no fixed formula for calculating maintenance, emphasizing a balanced consideration of multiple factors. 
• The Court criteria including:  
  • Social and financial status of parties 
  • Reasonable needs of wife and dependent children 
  • Qualifications and employment status 
  • Independent income/assets 
  • Matrimonial home's standard of living 
• The Court specifically included reasonable litigation costs for non-working wife as a factor to be considered. 
• The judgment emphasized consideration of husband's financial capacity, including his income, existing maintenance obligations, and liabilities. 
• The Court clarified that these factors are illustrative and not exhaustive, providing flexibility for courts to consider additional relevant circumstances. 

Source: Delhi High Court  

Why in News? 

A bench of Justice Yashwant Varma, Justice Rekha Palli and Justice C Hari Shankar held that all Bar Associations in the national capital shall hold elections on 7th February 2025.                       

• The Delhi High Court held this in the case of Nitin Kumar Advocate v. Bar Council of Delhi & Ors (2024). 

What was the Background of Nitin Kumar Advocate v. Bar Council of Delhi & Ors Case?  

• The matter concerns multiple writ petitions related to Bar Association elections in Delhi. 
• There is a significant pendency of applications at Level 2 (4,989 applications) and Level 3 (2,738 applications). 
• A total of 4,445 objections have been received for Level 2 scrutiny and 201 objections for Level 3. 
• The Supreme Court had recently clarified on 11th December 2024, that there is no interim stay against holding elections of High Courts or District Courts Bar Associations. 
• The case involves various Bar Associations including the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) and other Bar Associations in Delhi.   

What were the Court’s Observations?  

• The Court directed all authorities connected with the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) election to proceed expeditiously and complete all processes, including disposal of objections, in accordance with law. 
• The Court set a deadline of 10th January 2025, for completion of all scrutiny processes related to the DHCBA. 
• The Court ordered that the Election Commission should be constituted immediately after the closure of the scrutiny process. 
• The Court fixed 7th February 2025, as the date for holding elections to all Bar Associations in Delhi, subject to any legal restraint or impediment. 
• The Court noted that the election date was decided after considering submissions from all sides and taking into account the various preparatory steps required for conducting the elections. 
• The Court recorded that the 7th February 2025 date was fixed with the consent of all respective sides and parties present before the Court. 

What are Bar Associations? 

• A Bar association is simply a professional organization of lawyers that helps them develop their skills, ensures they follow ethical rules, and encourages them to use their legal knowledge to serve society. 
• According to legal scholar Roscoe Pound, the main purpose of a Bar association is to help lawyers practice law as a skilled profession that focuses on public service and ensuring justice is delivered according to the law, rather than treating law as just another business. 
• Bar associations serve two main functions - some act as regulatory bodies that oversee lawyers in their area, while others work as professional organizations that support their lawyer members. Many Bar associations actually do both of these things. 

What is Bar Council of India? 

• The Bar Council of India (BCI) is the country's highest regulatory body for the legal profession and legal education in India. 
• It was established under the Advocates Act, 1961. 
• Section 7 of the Advocates Act, 1961 provides the following regulatory and representative mandate for BCI: 
  • To lay down standards of professional conduct and etiquette for advocates. 
  • To lay down the procedure to be followed by its disciplinary committee and the disciplinary committee of each State Bar Councils. 
  • To safeguard the rights, privileges and interests of the advocates. 
  • To promote and support law reform. 
  • To deal with and dispose of any matter arising under this Act, which may be referred to it by the State Bar Council. 
  • To exercise general supervision and control over State Bar Councils. 
  • To promote legal education and to lay down standards of such education in consultation with the Universities in India imparting such education and the State Bar Councils. 
  • To recognize Universities whose degree in law shall be a qualification for enrolment as an advocate and for that purpose to visit and inspect Universities or cause the State Bar Councils to visit and inspect Universities in accordance with such directions as it may give in this behalf. 
  • To conduct seminars and organize talks on legal topics by eminent jurists and publish journals and papers of legal interest. 
  • To organize legal aid to the poor in the prescribed manner. 
  • To recognize on a reciprocal basis foreign qualification in law obtained outside India for the purpose of admission as an advocate under this Act. 
  • To manage and invest the funds of the Bar Council. 

What are the Other Bar Associations in India? 

• Supreme Court Bar Association 
  • The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) has over the years played a very important role in upholding democracy and rule of law. 
  • The SCBA demonstrated its commitment to public service in its first decade by establishing its own Legal Aid Scheme for poor litigants, while also supporting indigent members of the Bar who needed financial assistance and maintaining connections with other Bar Associations across India. 
  • During the turbulent period of 1970-1980, the SCBA played a crucial role in defending judicial independence 
  • The SCBA, along with other Bar Associations and public opinion, strongly opposed the government's controversial decision to supersede three Supreme Court judges (Hegde, Shelat, and Grover JJ) in favor of Justice A.N. Ray as Chief Justice, which Justice Hidayatullah criticized as creating judges who were "looking forward" to promotions rather than being "forward-looking." 
• Delhi High Court Bar Association 
  • The Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) is an association of dedicated lawyers that serves the legal profession and the public. 
  • It delivers this service by promoting the administration of justice, legal education, professional excellence and respect for the law. 
  • DHCBA aims to promote and project the privileges, rights, interests and prestige of the Association and its members and to promote unity and cooperation amongst advocates and other Association of Advocates. 
• Indian National Bar Association 
  • The Indian National Bar Association (INBA) is a non-profit, non-political, and non-governmental organization dedicated to serving the Indian legal community by providing educational programs and networking opportunities for its members. 
  • With over 4,000 registered members from India and around the world, INBA serves as a premier body representing the interests of the Indian legal community while working to deliver economic and social benefits to its members. 
  • The organization provides its members with valuable resources including networking opportunities, connections to foreign law firms, access to corporate counsel and universities, legal job opportunities, law books, and health and insurance packages. 
  • INBA functions as a think tank focused on reforming the Indian legal system to ensure quick and effective justice delivery for all citizens. 
  • A key objective of INBA is to reform India's bureaucratic rules, regulations, and legal systems to promote the nation's economic and business growth by reducing red tape.