Important Judgments and articles on rights of woman

 

1) When Justice Takes Pause: The Shifting Landscape of Bail for Women, the Pregnant, and the Infirm Under India’s Criminal Laws

Part 2: Pregnant Women and Nursing Mothers—When Two Lives Are One

The Invisible Category

Neither Section 437 of the CrPC nor Section 480 of the BNSS explicitly mentions pregnant women or nursing mothers. Yet pregnancy may fall under two categories: “woman” and “sick or infirm.” This ambiguity has forced courts to venture beyond the statutory text and into constitutional territory.

The judicial approach has been transformative. Courts now treat pregnancy as a “super-category”—a condition that engages the rights of two distinct entities: the mother and the unborn child. Both are constitutionally protected; neither is justiciable as a criminal actor.

https://www.lawweb.in/2025/12/when-justice-takes-pause-shifting.html

2) Bombay HC: Unmarried daughters, widows or destitute daughters have absolute right of residence in the immovable property of joint family as per S 14 of Hindu Succession Act 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Second Appeal No. 296 of 1993

Decided On: 13.08.2025

Anusaya Baburao Kale and Ors. Vs. Babai Laxman Chorge

Hon'ble Judges/Coram: Gauri Godse, J.

Citation: 2025:BHC-AS:35026, MANU/MH/5038/2025.

https://www.lawweb.in/2025/10/bombay-hc-unmarried-daughters-widows-or.html

3) Supreme Court: Sale Deed Executed After Adoption By Mother For Pre-Adoption Property Binding On Adopted Child

Though the alienation was subsequent to his adoption by virtue of the fact that Defendant No. 1 got absolute right and title in regard to the property covered by the said sale deed dated 13.12.2007 and that a valid sale was effected following the procedures, the challenge of the Appellant against the said alienation of property by Defendant No. 1 in favour of Defendant Nos. 2 and 3 is not liable to be interfered with. We have no hesitation to hold that the concurrent findings of the trial Court and the High Court in regard to the said sale deed warrant no interference. 

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal Nos. 36-37 of 2025.

Decided On: 02.01.2025

Mahesh Vs. Sangram and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

C.T. Ravikumar and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.

https://www.lawweb.in/2025/01/supreme-court-sale-deed-executed-after.html

4) Supreme Court: Distinction Between Section 14(1) and 14(2) of Hindu Succession Act : Antecedent Rights as the Determining Criterion

 it is now settled law that if a female Hindu acquires property under a written instrument or a decree of the Court and where such acquisition is not traceable to any antecedent right then sub-section (2) of Section 14 alone would be attracted and where an antecedent right is traceable, a document in the nature of will is of no consequence and the case will be covered by provisions contained in Section 14 Sub-section (1)..."

https://www.lawweb.in/2025/06/supreme-court-distinction-between.html

5) Supreme court: Hindu Woman Can Claim Full Ownership Of Property Under S.14(1) of Hindu Succession Act Only If She Possesses It

26. In this context, when we consider the effect of the earlier civil suit instituted by Smt. Nadkanwarbai(deceased widow), it becomes clear that she was never in possession of the suit property because the civil suit was filed by her claiming the relief of title as well as possession and the same was dismissed. This finding of the civil Court was never challenged. Since, Smt. Nadkanwarbai was never in possession of the suit property, as a necessary corollary the Revenue suit for partition claiming absolute ownership Under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act could not be maintained by her adopted son, Plaintiff Kailash Chand by virtue of inheritance.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 6460 of 2024.

Decided On: 16.05.2024

Mukatlal Vs. Kailash Chand (D) through L.Rs. and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.

Author: Sandeep Mehta, J.

 Citation: 2024 INSC 428, MANU/SC/0447/2024.

https://www.lawweb.in/2025/10/supreme-court-hindu-woman-can-claim.html

6) Supreme Court Refers To Larger Bench Conflicting Opinions On Female Hindu's Rights Under S.14 of Hindu Succession Act

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 6557 of 2022

Decided On: 09.12.2024

Tej Bhan (D) through L.R. and Ors. Vs. Ram Kishan (D) through L.Rs. and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.

Citation: 2024 INSC 945,MANU/SC/1301/2024

https://www.lawweb.in/2025/10/supreme-court-refers-to-larger-bench.html

7) The Crucible of Confusion: Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act and the Supreme Court's Clarion Call for Legal Certainty

What Approach Should Courts Follow Presently?

The Supreme Court's Clear Directive

The Supreme Court has provided explicit guidance on this critical question through its recent jurisprudence and the principles established in State of Jharkhand v. Lal Mohar Shaw and Prem Kumar v. High Court of Delhi:

1. Tulasamma Remains Binding Until Overruled

Courts must continue to follow the Tulasamma principles as binding precedent since "a binding precedent is binding until it is overruled by another final judgment". The mere fact that a reference has been made to a larger bench "does not make it ineffective nor is the same to be considered as stayed".

2. No Indefinite Deferral of Cases

The Supreme Court has categorically stated that "all cases involving the same issue cannot be deferred indefinitely nor can they be stayed, as the consequences of the same are grave and adverse". Courts must proceed to decide matters based on existing law rather than await the larger bench decision.

3. Precedential Hierarchy

When faced with conflicting judgments by benches of equal strength, courts should follow the earlier judgment as established precedent.

https://www.lawweb.in/2025/10/the-crucible-of-confusion-section-14-of.html

Print Page