
Supreme Court Questions Relevance of Two-Child Norm, Refers 2003 Judgment to Larger Bench
What Happened?
The Supreme Court of India has referred the 2003 judgment on the two-child norm to a larger bench, citing declining fertility rates and changing demographics. The court questioned the rationale behind laws disqualifying candidates with more than two children from local body elections.
Key points
- The Supreme Court referred the 2003 Javed v State of Haryana judgment to a larger bench.
- The court noted India's total fertility rate has decreased from 3 in 2003 to 1.9 currently.
- Justice Narasimha stated that laws penalizing more than two children have lost relevance due to demographic changes.
- The court quashed the disqualification of Mangala Bhimrao, a former Sarpanch, under the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act.
- The court emphasized that continuing such laws would exclude a significant portion of citizens from political representation.
Key insights
- The court's decision may lead to a reevaluation of family planning policies in India.
- A shift in laws could encourage greater political participation among families with more than two children.
- This development reflects broader demographic trends that may influence future governance.
Why it matters
The Supreme Court's review could reshape political representation laws in India, impacting citizens with more than two children.
Entities
Source
Times Now
