Recent Changes in Indian Marriage and Divorce Laws

Indian marriage and divorce law is going through a major transformation. Over the last decade, especially between 2017 and 2025, the Supreme Court and High Courts have delivered several landmark rulings that have reshaped how marriage, divorce, and women’s rights are understood under the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA), Special Marriage Act (SMA), Muslim personal law, and the Indian Divorce Act, 1869. While Parliament has made few reforms, the courts have increasingly used constitutional principles, equality, dignity, autonomy, to update and modernise family law.

1. MUSLIM LAW

1. Stronger Property Rights for Divorced Muslim Women

In December 2025, the Supreme Court delivered a major judgment strengthening the financial rights of divorced Muslim women. The Court held that a divorced woman is entitled to reclaim all gifts, cash, gold, and valuables given at the time of marriage—even if these were handed to the husband or his family.

The Court clarified that marriage gifts remain the woman’s exclusive property, similar to stridhan. The husband and his family are only custodians, not owners.

Alongside this, in July 2024, the Supreme Court also confirmed that a divorced Muslim woman may seek maintenance under Section 125 CrPC (now Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita or the BNSS) in addition to her rights under the 1986 Act. The Court rejected arguments that the 1986 Act is the only remedy. Now, Muslim women have two parallel routes for post-divorce maintenance, strengthening their financial security.

2. Scrutiny of Polygamy

Between 2023 and 2025, the Kerala High Court delivered important rulings that significantly narrowed the scope of polygamy under Muslim personal law. In Jubairiya v. Saidalavi (2025), the Court held that Islam permits polygamy only in rare cases, and only when a man can prove he can treat multiple wives with equal justice and provide adequate financial support.

The Court examined Quranic verses (notably 4:3 and 4:129) and reasoned that monogamy is the general rule, while polygamy is a heavily restricted exception. If a man cannot support multiple wives or ensure fairness, he has no legal right to marry again.

The Court further asked the State to offer counselling and protection to women affected by irresponsible polygamous relationships. This marks a major shift: polygamy is no longer an unchecked male privilege but a conditional, accountable system, guided by constitutional equality.

3. The End of Instant Triple Talaq, and the Pending Challenge to Talaq-e-Hasan

In the landmark case Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017), the Supreme Court struck down instant triple talaq (talaq-e-biddah) as unconstitutional. The Court held that the practice was arbitrary, had no basis in Quranic principles, and violated Articles 14, 15, and 21. This decision confirmed that personal law practices are subject to constitutional review, rejecting the older idea that religious law is beyond scrutiny.

However, the ruling did not address other forms of talaq. As of late 2025, the Supreme Court is hearing challenges to talaq-e-hasan, where talaq is pronounced once a month over three months. The Court has expressed concern about whether such unilateral divorce mechanisms are compatible with women’s dignity and equality. Though undecided, the Court’s questions suggest growing discomfort with practices that give men one-sided power to end a marriage.

2. CHRISTIAN DIVORCE

1. Waiting Period for Mutual Consent Divorce Struck Down

Under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, Christian couples seeking a mutual consent divorce had to live separately for one full year before filing. In December 2022, the Kerala High Court struck down this mandatory waiting period as unconstitutional. The Court held that when both spouses clearly agree the marriage has broken down, forcing them to continue suffering for another year is unfair and violates personal liberty under Article 21. It noted that such a waiting period does not exist in the same form for Hindu or interfaith couples. The ruling makes Christian couples equal to others in India when seeking consensual divorce and prevents unnecessary delays in dissolving dead marriages.

3. HINDU LAW

1. Notaries Cannot Perform Marriage or Divorce Functions

In October 2024, the Union Ministry of Law & Justice clarified that notaries under the Notaries Act, 1952 cannot execute marriage or divorce deeds, issue marriage certificates, or certify affidavits meant to function like marriage documents.

Such acts fall within the authority of Marriage Officers under specific marriage statutes. Any notary performing these tasks commits professional misconduct.

Though administrative on its face, this clarification protects couples from entering invalid or poorly documented marriages/divorces and reinforces the State’s role in formally supervising matrimonial processes.

2. Supreme Court’s New Power to Grant Divorce Without Statutory Grounds (Article 142)

A major constitutional breakthrough came in 2023, when a Constitution Bench ruled that the Supreme Court can grant divorce on the basis of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, even though this ground does not exist in the HMA or SMA.

Under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, the Court may dissolve a marriage when:

• it is convinced the relationship has completely collapsed,
• the parties have been separated for years,
• there is no chance of reunion, and
• continuing the marriage would only prolong suffering.

Importantly, the Court held it may also waive the six-month cooling-off period for mutual consent divorce if it finds reconciliation impossible.

The judgment listed factors for assessing breakdown: long separation (often six years or more), past litigation, mediation attempts, the nature of allegations, dependency of spouses, welfare of children, and fairness of financial arrangements.

This ruling moved the law beyond rigid fault-based rules (cruelty, adultery, desertion) and allowed the Supreme Court to prioritise human dignity, autonomy, and practical justice. The Court has since applied this power in multiple cases, helping couples escape marriages locked in legal deadlock.

4. MARRIAGE EQUALITY

In Supriyo v. Union of India (2023), several queer couples asked the Supreme Court to interpret the Special Marriage Act in a gender-neutral way so that same-sex partners could marry. A five-judge Bench delivered a deeply significant but cautious judgment.

The Court acknowledged the dignity and constitutional value of queer relationships and affirmed that LGBTQ+ persons have the right to love, cohabit, and form families without discrimination. However, it declined to reinterpret the SMA to include same-sex marriage, holding that:

• The right to marry, unlike the right to love or cohabit, is a statutory right, not a fundamental right.
• Changing the SMA’s structure must be done by Parliament, not by judicial rewriting.
• Striking down SMA entirely would harm interfaith and inter-caste couples who rely on it.

Two judges nevertheless suggested that the State should create some form of civil union or partnership recognition for queer couples.

While the judgment did not grant marriage rights, it created a strong constitutional foundation for future legislative reform and confirmed that queer relationships are entitled to State protection and respect.

Conclusion

Across all personal law systems—Hindu, Muslim, Christian, and secular—the last several years have brought a wave of judicial reform focused on dignity, autonomy, gender equality, and constitutional supremacy. 

From granting Muslim women clear property and maintenance rights, to recognising breakdown of marriage as a real legal ground, to harmonising divorce procedures and engaging deeply with marriage equality—the courts have pushed Indian family law into a more modern, rights-oriented era.

References:

1. https://theprint.in/judiciary/sc-ruling-on-wedding-gifts-another-win-for-muslim-women-but-battle-over-personal-laws-continues/2800246/
2. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/divorced-muslim-woman-has-right-to-return-of-dower-dowry-says-sc-101764702073956.html
3. https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/couples-dont-have-to-be-separated-for-a-year-to-file-for-divorce-by-mutual-consent-rules-kerala-high-court-3593588
4. https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/irretrievable-breakdown-of-marriage-a-ground-to-dissolve-marriage-invoking-article-142-powers-supreme-court-227617
5. https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2024/02/23/beyond-traditional-grounds-hindu-law-supreme-court-power-grant-divorce-ground-of-irretrievable-breakdown-of-marriage/