List of Current Affairs

Source: Supreme Court  

Why in News? 

Recently, Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih upheld the Allahabad High Court's 2022 guidelines mandating the constitution of Family Welfare Committees to prevent misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), directing authorities to implement them effectively. 

• The Supreme Court held this in the matter of Shivangi Bansal v. Sahib Bansal (2025). 

What was the Background of Shivangi Bansal v. Sahib Bansal (2025) Case? 

• Shivangi Bansal (also known as Shivangi Goel) and Sahib Bansal were married on 5th December 2015 at Umrao Farmhouse, Delhi, according to Hindu rites and customs, and were blessed with a daughter named Ms. Raina born on 23rd December 2016. 
• Due to escalating matrimonial discord and disputes between the parties and their respective family members, the couple separated on 4th October 2018, after which both parties have been living separately with the minor daughter remaining in the custody of her mother. 
• Following the separation, Shivangi Bansal filed multiple serious criminal cases against her husband and his family members, including FIR No. 567/2018 under IPC Sections 498A (cruelty offence), 307 (attempt to murder), 376 (rape), 323, 504, 506, 511, 120B, 377, 313, 342, and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 
• The wife also initiated three separate cases under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, multiple complaints under Section 406 IPC (criminal breach of trust), and civil proceedings including maintenance petition under Section 125 CrPC and divorce petition under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act. 
• In response, Sahib Bansal filed counter-criminal cases against his wife and her family under various IPC sections including 365 (kidnapping), 323, 341, 506, 354, 385, 509, and 34, along with defamation complaints under Sections 500 and 501 IPC, and civil proceedings for divorce and guardianship. 
• As a consequence of the criminal cases filed by the wife, the husband remained in judicial custody for 109 days and his father for 103 days, causing significant physical and mental trauma to the entire family due to the protracted legal battle. 
• Both parties ultimately expressed their desire to amicably resolve all disputes, including matters of child custody, and settle all pending litigations to avoid future litigation and maintain peace between their families. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Supreme Court endorsed the safeguards laid down by the Allahabad High Court regarding the establishment of Family Welfare Committees (FWC) and directed that the guidelines framed by the High Court shall remain in effect to prevent the misuse of Section 498A IPC (cruelty offence) in matrimonial disputes. 
• The Court observed that it has been repeatedly expressing concerns about the misuse of Section 498A IPC and its corresponding provision Section 85 BNS, noting the increasing tendency among litigants to implicate the husband and his entire family through broad and sweeping allegations. 
• The Court made significant observations regarding the consequences of false criminal cases, noting that the husband remained in jail for 109 days and his father for 103 days, and observed that "What they have suffered cannot be resituated or compensated in any manner." 
• The Court recognised the extensive nature of the legal battle, observing that the wife had filed six separate criminal cases against the husband and his family, along with multiple civil proceedings, creating a protracted legal dispute that caused immense trauma to all parties involved. 
• The Court deemed it appropriate to invoke its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to do complete justice by dissolving the marriage and quashing all pending criminal and civil litigations between the parties to bring an end to the legal battle. 
• The Court ordered that the wife and her parents tender an unconditional apology to the husband and his family members, to be published in national newspapers and on social media platforms, as a form of moral redress for the trauma caused by false cases. 
• The Court specifically observed the wife's position as an IPS officer and directed that she shall never use her position and power, or that of her colleagues and superiors, against the husband and his family members, while also directing police protection for the husband's family and comprehensive restraints to prevent any future litigation between the parties. 

What are the Family Welfare Committee Guidelines by High Court ? 

• No arrest or police action shall be taken against accused persons in Section 498A IPC cases without completing a mandatory two-month "Cooling-Period" from the date of lodging the FIR or complaint, during which the matter must be referred to the Family Welfare Committee (FWC). 
• The FWC guidelines apply only to cases involving Section 498A IPC along with other offences where the punishment is less than 10 years imprisonment, excluding cases with Section 307 IPC where injury is involved. 
• Every district shall establish at least one FWC comprising three members under the District Legal Aid Services Authority, with composition reviewed periodically by the District & Sessions Judge who acts as Chairperson of the Legal Service Authority. 
• FWC members include young mediators or advocates with up to five years practice, recognized social workers with clean background, retired judicial officers, or educated wives of senior judicial/administrative officers, and these members shall never be called as witnesses. 
• Upon receiving Section 498A complaints, the Magistrate must immediately refer the matter to FWC, which shall summon both parties along with four elderly persons each for personal interaction and attempt settlement within the two-month period. 
• During FWC deliberations, police officers must avoid any arrest or coercive action but may continue peripheral investigation including medical reports, injury reports, and witness statements, with the Committee preparing a detailed report for the Magistrate after two months. 
• FWC members work on pro bono basis or receive minimum honorarium fixed by District Judge, receive basic training from Legal Services Aid Committee, and when settlement is achieved, the District Judge may dispose of proceedings including closure of criminal cases. 

What is Section 85 and 86 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023 (BNS) ? 

• Section 85 of the BNS corresponds to Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and criminalizes cruelty by a husband or his relatives against a woman, prescribing punishment of imprisonment up to three years along with fine. 
• Under BNSS classification, the offence is cognizable only when information is given by the aggrieved woman or her blood/marriage/adoption relatives, or in absence of such relatives, by notified public servants of specified categories as determined by the State Government. 
• The offence under Section 85 BNS is non-bailable in nature and triable by a Magistrate of the first class, maintaining the serious legal consequences associated with matrimonial cruelty cases. 
• Section 86 BNS defines "cruelty" for the purposes of Section 85, encompassing two distinct categories of conduct that constitute the offence against married women. 
• The first category of cruelty under Section 86(1) includes any wilful conduct likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or cause grave injury or danger to her life, limb, or health, whether mental or physical. 
• The second category under Section 86(2) covers harassment of the woman with intent to coerce her or her relatives to meet unlawful demands for property or valuable security, or harassment due to failure to meet such demands. 
• The BNS provisions maintain the essential elements and legal framework of the erstwhile IPC Section 498A while transitioning to the new criminal law structure, preserving the protective mechanism for married women against domestic cruelty.

Source: Supreme Court  

Why in News? 

Recently, the Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria that reserves its order after offering the estranged wife a choice between a ₹4 crore lump sum or ownership of the flat, emphasizing dignity through self-reliance over exaggerated maintenance claims. 

• The Supreme Court held this in the matter of X v. Y (2025). 

What was the Background of X v. Y (2025) Case ? 

• The couple was married for only 18 months before separating. 
• The husband sought annulment of the marriage, alleging that his wife was mentally ill and calling her "schizophrenic". 
• The woman denied these allegations, asking the court rhetorically if she appeared unwell. 
• The parties had initially agreed to a mutual consent divorce with a settlement agreement. 
• Under this agreement, the wife was to receive a flat at Kalpataru Habitat, Mumbai as full and final settlement. 
• Both parties were to withdraw over 20 pending cases between them. 
• However, after the First Motion for mutual consent divorce was allowed by a Delhi court, the wife withdrew her consent for the Second Motion, seeking a better financial settlement instead. 
  • She holds an MBA degree and has worked in the IT sector. 
• She was currently residing in the disputed Mumbai flat with two parking spots. 
• Her husband had filed FIRs against her, which she claimed affected her employability. 
• The husband's declared income was ₹2.5 crore with ₹1 crore in bonuses during 2015-16. 
• The husband came from considerable wealth, according to the woman. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Supreme Court Bench, led by Chief Justice BR Gavai, was highly critical of the woman's demands: 
  • "Marriage lasted just 18 months. And you are seeking a crore a month?" 
  • The court questioned the quantum of demand (₹12 crore plus a Mumbai flat) given the brief marriage duration. 
• The court strongly emphasized that educated women should be self-reliant: 
  • "You are well educated. You should not be depending on handouts. You should earn and live with dignity" 
  • "You are employable in places like Bengaluru and Hyderabad. Why not work?" 
  • The court noted there was demand in IT centers and she should seek employment. 
• The court offered two alternatives: 
  • Accept the flat without any legal encumbrance, or 
  • Take a lump sum settlement of ₹4 crore. 
• The court was categorical that educated and capable individuals should not choose unemployment and then claim excessive maintenance. 
• The Bench emphasized the principle of self-reliance over dependency, particularly for qualified professionals. 

What are the Legal Provisions for Maintenance and Alimony under Different Personal Laws in India? 

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: 

• Section 24: Interim maintenance during pending proceedings. 
• Section 25: Permanent alimony and maintenance after divorce. 
• Applies to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs. 
• Either spouse can claim maintenance. 

Special Marriage Act, 1954: 

• Section 36: Interim maintenance. 
• Section 37: Permanent alimony post-divorce. 
• Applies to inter-religious marriages. 
• Similar provisions to Hindu Marriage Act. 

Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (for Christians): 

• Section 36: Interim maintenance. 
• Section 37: Permanent alimony. 
• Courts consider the income/property of both spouses. 

Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936: 

• Section 39: Permanent alimony provisions. 
• A wife can claim maintenance after divorce. 
• Considers standard of living during marriage. 

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. 

How do Indian Courts Determine the Quantum of Maintenance and Alimony under Hindu Personal Laws? 

Quantum of Maintenance Under Section 23 of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956: 

• The determination of maintenance quantum under Section 23 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, follows a comprehensive assessment framework. Courts must evaluate the position and social status of both parties to ensure maintenance aligns with their living standards. 
• The reasonable needs and requirements of the claimant are carefully examined, considering whether separate living arrangements are justified under the circumstances. 
• Additionally, courts assess the claimant's existing financial resources, including property value, income sources, and personal earnings, while also considering the total number of persons entitled to maintenance under the Act to ensure fair distribution among all beneficiaries. 

Supreme Court's Flexible Guidelines for Alimony Determination: 

• The Supreme Court has established flexible principles rather than rigid formulas for determining alimony, emphasizing a holistic approach to maintenance settlements. 
• These guidelines consider the social and economic status of both spouses, the basic future needs of the wife and children, and the qualification and employment status of both parties.  
• Courts examine the means of income and property ownership, the wife's standard of living during marriage, and any employment sacrifices made for family responsibilities.  
• The guidelines also account for reasonable litigation costs for non-working wives and critically assess the husband's financial capacity and existing maintenance obligations to ensure fair and just settlements. 

Section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act - Permanent Alimony Framework: 

• Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, provides a comprehensive framework for permanent alimony and maintenance after divorce or separation.  
• This provision allows either spouse to apply for maintenance, which can be awarded as a gross sum payment or through periodical payments for a term not exceeding the applicant's lifetime. 
• Courts exercise broad discretionary powers, considering the respondent's income and property, the applicant's financial position, the conduct of both parties, and other relevant circumstances.  
• The section also incorporates flexibility through modification provisions, allowing courts to vary or rescind maintenance orders due to changed circumstances, remarriage, or specific conduct issues.