![]() |
Modern Hindu law is one of the personal law systems of India along with similar systems for Muslims, Sikhs, Parsis, and Christians. This Hindu Personal Law or modern Hindu law is an extension of the Anglo-Hindu Law developed during the British colonial period in India, which is in turn related to the less well-defined tradition of Classical Hindu Law. The time frame of this period of Hindu law begins with the formal independence of India from Great Britain on August 14, 1947, and extends up until the present. While modern Hindu law is heralded for its inherent respect for religious doctrines, many still complain that discrimination (especially with the historical tradition of the caste system) still pervades the legal system, though efforts to modernize and increase the legal rights of the marginalized have been made (most notably with the passage of the Hindu Code Bills and the establishment of notable legal precedents).
With the formal independence of India from Great Britain on August 15, 1947, India acquired a new constitution as well as a complex legal system. While a Western influence is apparent in this system, it is not an exact replication. The Indian legal system has characteristics of common law, but is codified and thus is actually more similar to civil law in nature. The modern Hindu legal system is applied to strictly personal law, including issues of marriage, inheritance and adoption, whereas India's secular legal system is applied to issues of criminal law and civil law.
India's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, and the then law minister, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, worked to unify the newly independent India by proposing the reformation and codification of Hindu personal law. Nehru's efforts led to contentious debates over the so-called Hindu Code Bill, which he offered in the Indian parliament, as a way to fix still unclear elements of the Anglo-Hindu law. The Hindu Code Bill was initially and continues to be very controversial within and outside of the Hindu community. Criticism of the document is based on the belief that the laws in the Hindu Code bill should apply to all citizens regardless of religious affiliation. [1] 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.
Nehru completed codification and partial reform, but overall the legal system only slightly changed. In the end, a series of four major pieces of personal law 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). Though these legislative moves purported to resolve still unclear parts of the Anglo-Hindu law, the case law and interpretive tradition of British judges and Indian judges in the British employ remained and remains crucial to the application of modern Hindu law.
As stated by Article 44 of the Indian Constitution, India is a secular state that strives towards legal uniformity. Many argue that the commitment of the Indian government towards this gradual uniformity of the legal system threatens the minority religious groups that utilize the plurality of the law to maintain traditions and implement their religious laws.
Before discussing the modern application and sources of Hindu law it is important to outline whom these laws govern. In the case of Hindu personal and family laws, as outlined by the Acts of Parliament discussed below, those that are followers the Hindu religion, as well as those who are not Christian, Jewish or Muslim, are held accountable to these laws. [2] Therefore, it is assumed that all Indians who are not Muslim, Jewish or Christian are Hindu, disregarding personal religious laws of followers of Buddhist, Jain, Sikh and other religions, creating controversy within these communities. The Indian legal system does recognize Muslim, Jewish and Christian family courts as well as secular family courts.
Sources of Classical Hindu law arose from the religious texts of the Dharmaśāstra , as well as sadachar or customs, and commentaries or digests that translated and interpreted the laws. Since British colonial rule, India has codified several aspects of the Hindu tradition into the Indian legal system as well as adopted common and civil legal procedures. [2]
Legislation, as created and implemented by the Indian government, is the strongest source of law in all Indian courts. In the case of two conflicting sources, legislation holds the highest jurisdiction. [2] While it is not a traditional source of law for the Hindu legal system, it is the latest and most legitimate form.
During colonial rule, the British codified several aspects of the Hindu legal tradition into the Indian legal system, based upon the large number of Hindus residing in British India. Thus upon gaining independence, many of the same laws that governed the country during colonial rule were maintained as such, making the Indian Constitution and legal system heavily influenced with Hindu legal traditions at its foundation. [3]
India is based on the British common legal system, thus the courts rely heavily on stare decisis , or precedent, when deciding cases. Any case decision made by a higher court is a source of law to all of the lower courts, in the prospect that the laws will be applied in a similar manner. The Hindu family courts are expected to follow laws handed down from previous cases.
Modern Hindu law relies on the interpretation of judges and their ability to decipher mitigating factors within each legal situation. [3] This is reflective of the ancient Hindu legal tradition of working out problems on a case specific basis in finding justice in each specific instance.
As is the case with many global legal systems that rely on precedents as a source of law, certain cases stand out that have shaped the Indian legal system into what it is today. Not only do they provide the foundation for future legal cases but they also make a statement about the state of the country and what direction it wants to lead. One such case came about during the efforts of modernization reforms in India. Known as the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act (1971), the law allowed Indian women to legally obtain abortions. Thus this law made not only a religious statement, as India was trying to become more secular, but also made a statement of equality as it expanded the rights women had.[ citation needed ]
Early in December 2008, a marriage between a Hindu and a Christian was deemed invalid under the Hindu Marriage Act (1955) as the Act provides for only Hindu couples to enter into a wedlock, the Supreme Court has ruled. [4] Allegedly, Raj had misinformed his wife about his social status and she filed for divorce. He claimed that the Hindu Marriage Act does not preclude a Hindu from marrying a person of another faith. Dismissing the Christian husband’s appeal, the apex court upheld the High Courts’s view that the marriage not valid under the Hindu Marriage Act, specifically pointing to the fact that Section 5 of the Act makes it clear that a marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus if the conditions in the said Section were fulfilled. [4]
Following independence, the Indian government led by Jawaharlal Nehru completed the codification and reform of Hindu personal law, a process that had been begun by the British. According to the British policy of noninterference, reform of personal law should have arisen from a demand from the Hindu community. This was not the case, as there was significant opposition from various Hindu politicians, organizations, and devotees who saw themselves unjustly singled out as the sole religious community whose laws were to be reformed. [5] However, the administration saw such codification as necessary in order to unify the Hindu community, which ideally would be a first step towards unifying the nation. [6] They succeeded in passing four Hindu Code Bills, including Hindu Marriage Act (1955), Hindu Succession Act (1956), Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (1956), and Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (1956). [7]
Nehru and his supporters insisted that the Hindu community, which comprised 80% of the Indian population, first needed to be united before any actions were taken to unify the rest of India. Therefore, the codification of Hindu personal law became a symbolic beginning on the road to establishing the Indian national identity. [6] Nehru also felt that because he was Hindu, it was his prerogative to codify specifically Hindu law, as opposed to Muslim or Jewish law. [8]
Those in Parliament who supported the Bills also saw them as a vital move towards the modernization of Hindu society, as they would clearly delineate secular laws from religious law. Many also heralded the Bill’s opportunity to implement greater rights for women, establishing that such rights were necessary for India’s development. [9]
The Hindu Code Bills are still controversial among some communities, including women's, nationalist, and religious groups. At the time of their creation, many portrayed them as a serious deviation from Hindu legal precedent. However, now many, including Nivedita Menon, argue that it is "misleading...to claim that Hindu personal law was reformed [in the 1950s]. It was merely codified, and even that was in the face of stiff resistance from Congress leaders." [10]
There are no religious courts in India, as it is a secular nation. Rather religious personal laws are adjudicated by the state on a case by case basis.
The court system of India is essentially divided into three tiers, the Supreme Court of India at the apex of the hierarchy for the entire country, twenty-one High Courts at the top of the hierarchy in each State, and subsequent district courts that govern family, criminal and civil laws within the states. The High Courts have jurisdiction over a state, a union territory or a group of states and union territories. District courts are the courts of first resort. It is within the district courts that Hindu law and other religious laws are administered. State judges apply Hindu law on a case by case basis.
The judges that preside over the district courts in India are state bureaucrats, not religious priests or scholars. Thus it is possible for a Hindu judge to preside over a divorce case between a Muslim couple or for a Christian judge to preside over a case involving a Hindu family. With no formal education on the religious laws of the state, judges may not be well versed in the laws they are to adjudicate. They rely heavily on case precedent and scholarly works to guide them through the cases. [11]
Lawyers in India are trained in general law schools and receive no formal and specific training on Hindu law, Muslim law, or any other personal religious laws. All lawyers are however required to take courses regarding personal law. These larger courses touch on the variety of personal laws that exist in India, including Hindu Law.
Religious law includes ethical and moral codes taught by religious traditions. Different religious systems hold sacred law in a greater or lesser degree of importance to their belief systems, with some being explicitly antinomian whereas others are nomistic or "legalistic" in nature. In particular, religions such as Judaism, Islam and the Baháʼí Faith teach the need for revealed positive law for both state and society, whereas other religions such as Christianity generally reject the idea that this is necessary or desirable and instead emphasise the eternal moral precepts of divine law over the civil, ceremonial or judicial aspects, which may have been annulled as in theologies of grace over law.
Legal history or the history of law is the study of how law has evolved and why it has changed. Legal history is closely connected to the development of civilisations and operates in the wider context of social history. Certain jurists and historians of legal process have seen legal history as the recording of the evolution of laws and the technical explanation of how these laws have evolved with the view of better understanding the origins of various legal concepts; some consider legal history a branch of intellectual history. Twentieth-century historians viewed legal history in a more contextualised manner – more in line with the thinking of social historians. They have looked at legal institutions as complex systems of rules, players and symbols and have seen these elements interact with society to change, adapt, resist or promote certain aspects of civil society. Such legal historians have tended to analyse case histories from the parameters of social-science inquiry, using statistical methods, analysing class distinctions among litigants, petitioners and other players in various legal processes. By analyzing case outcomes, transaction costs, and numbers of settled cases, they have begun an analysis of legal institutions, practices, procedures and briefs that gives a more complex picture of law and society than the study of jurisprudence, case law and civil codes can achieve.
The Uniform Civil Code is a proposal in India to formulate and implement personal laws of citizens which apply on all citizens equally regardless of their religion, gender and sexual orientation. Currently, personal laws of various communities are governed by their religious scriptures. Implementation of a uniform civil code across the nation is one of the contentious promises pursued by India's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party. Personal laws are distinguished from public law and cover marriage, divorce, inheritance, adoption and maintenance. While Article 25-28 of the Indian Constitution guarantees religious freedom to Indian citizens and allows religious groups to maintain their own affairs, article 44 of the constitution expects the Indian state to apply directive principles and common law for all Indian citizens while formulating national policies.
Mohd. Ahmad Khan v. Shah Bano Begum [1985 (1) SCALE 767 = 1985 (3) SCR 844 = 1985 (2) SCC 556 = AIR 1985 SC 945], commonly referred to as the Shah Bano case, was a controversial maintenance lawsuit in India, in which the Supreme Court delivered a judgment favouring maintenance given to an aggrieved divorced Muslim woman. Then the Congress government enacted a law with its most controversial aspect being the right to maintenance for the period of iddat after the divorce, and shifting the onus of maintaining her to her relatives or the Waqf Board. It was seen as discriminatory as it denied right to basic maintenance available to Muslim women under secular law.
The legal system of India consists of civil law, common law, customary law, religious law and corporate law within the legal framework inherited from the colonial era and various legislation first introduced by the British are still in effect in modified forms today. Since the drafting of the Indian Constitution, Indian laws also adhere to the United Nations guidelines on human rights law and the environmental law.
The Manusmṛiti, also known as the Mānava-Dharmaśāstra or Laws of Manu, is one of the many legal texts and constitutions among the many Dharmaśāstras of Hinduism. In ancient India, the sages often wrote their ideas on how society should run in the manuscripts. It is believed that the original form of Manusmriti was changed and interpolated with commentaries and opinions of the writers rather than the original content, as many things written in the manuscript contradict each other.
Section 377 of the British colonial penal code criminalized all sexual acts "against the order of nature". The law was used to prosecute people engaging in oral and anal sex along with homosexual activity. As per Supreme Court Judgement since 2018 Indian Penal Code Section 377 is used for Convictions of non consensual sexual activities among homosexuals with a minimum of ten years imprisonment extended to life imprisonment. It has been used to criminalize third gender people, such as the apwint in Myanmar. In 2018, British Prime Minister Theresa May acknowledged how the legacies of British colonial anti-sodomy laws continue to persist today in the form of discrimination, violence, and death.
Hindu law, as a historical term, refers to the code of laws applied to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs in British India. Hindu law, in modern scholarship, also refers to the legal theory, jurisprudence and philosophical reflections on the nature of law discovered in ancient and medieval era Indian texts. It is one of the oldest known jurisprudence theories in the world and began three thousand years ago whose original sources were the Hindu texts.
India since its independence in 1947 became a Hindu majority state since Partition of India until 1976. Some of the secular values were enshrined in the constitution of India. India's prime minister Indira Gandhi is credited for establishing India as a full & fledged secular state.
Israeli law is based mostly on a common law legal system, though it also reflects the diverse history of the territory of the State of Israel throughout the last hundred years, as well as the legal systems of its major religious communities. The Israeli legal system is based on common law, which also incorporates facets of civil law. The Israeli Declaration of Independence asserted that a formal constitution would be written, though it has been continuously postponed since 1950. Instead, the Basic Laws of Israel function as the country's constitutional laws. Statutes enacted by the Knesset, particularly the Basic Laws, provide a framework which is enriched by political precedent and jurisprudence. Foreign and historical influences on modern-day Israeli law are varied and include the Mecelle and German civil law, religious law, and British common law. The Israeli courts have been influenced in recent years by American Law and Canadian Law and to a lesser extent by Continental Law.
Bangladesh is a common law country having its legal system developed by the British rulers during their colonial rule over British India. The land now comprises Bangladesh was known as Bengal during the British and Mughal regime while by some other names earlier. Though there were religious and political equipments and institutions from almost prehistoric era, Mughals first tried to recognise and establish them through state mechanisms. The Charter of 1726, granted by King George I, authorised the East India Company to establish Mayor's Courts in Madras, Bombay and Calcutta and is recognised as the first codified law for the British India. As a part of the then British India, it was the first codified law for the then Bengal too. Since independence in 1971, statutory law enacted by the Parliament of Bangladesh has been the primary form of legislation. Judge-made law continues to be significant in areas such as constitutional law. Unlike in other common law countries, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh has the power to not only interpret laws made by the parliament, but to also declare them null and void and to enforce fundamental rights of the citizens. The Bangladesh Code includes a compilation of all laws since 1836. The vast majority of Bangladeshi laws are in English. But most laws adopted after 1987 are in Bengali. Family law is intertwined with religious law. Bangladesh has significant international law obligations.
Anglo-Hindu law is the case law that developed in British India, through the interpretation of the Hindu scriptures and customary law in the British courts.
The Hindu code bills were several laws passed in the 1950s that aimed to codify and reform Hindu personal law in India, abolishing religious law in favor of a common law code. The Indian National Congress government led by Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru successfully implemented the reforms in 1950s. This process was started during the British rule of India.
The Hindu Marriage Act is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted in 1955 which was passed on 18th of May. Three other important acts were also enacted as part of the Hindu Code Bills during this time: the Hindu Succession Act (1956), the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (1956), the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (1956).
Anglo-Hindu law reflected the difference in values between "law" in Western tradition and colonial Hindu tradition. It was not until the 1770s, when the British Empire came to colonize India, that the concept of law came into practice.
Sharia means Islamic law based on age-old concepts. Since the early Islamic states of the eighth and ninth centuries, Sharia always existed alongside other normative systems.
Law in India primarily evolved from customary practices and religious prescriptions in the Indian subcontinent, to the modern well-codified acts and laws based on a constitution in the Republic of India. The various stages of evolution of Indian law is classified as that during the Vedic period, the Islamic period, the British period and post independence.
Sarla Mudgal v. Union Of India is a Supreme Court of India case. Its judgement in 1995 laid down the principles against the practice of solemnizing second marriage by conversion to Islam, with first marriage not being dissolved. The verdict discusses issue of bigamy, the conflict between the personal laws existing on matters of marriage and invokes article 44 of Indian Constitution. It is considered a landmark decision that highlighted the need for a uniform civil code.
Triple talaq and talaq-e-mughallazah are now-banned means of Islamic divorce previously available to Muslims in India, especially adherents of Hanafi Sunni Islamic schools of jurisprudence. A Muslim man could legally divorce his wife by proclaiming three times consecutively the word talaq.
All the Muslims in India are governed by the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937. This law deals with marriage, succession, inheritance and charities among Muslims. The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 deals with the circumstances in which Muslim women can obtain divorce and rights of Muslim women who have been divorced by their husbands and to provide for related matters. These laws are not applicable in the state of Goa, where Goa civil code is applicable for all persons irrespective of religion. These laws are not applicable to Indians, including Muslims, who married under the Special Marriage Act, 1954.