LANDMARK CASE
Shamim Ara v. State of Uttar Pradesh
(2002) 7 SCC 518 · Supreme Court of India · Family law
At a glance
- Citation: (2002) 7 SCC 518
- Court: Supreme Court of India
- Area of law: Family law
- In one line: No. Talaq must be for a reasonable cause and preceded by attempts at reconciliation, and must be proved.
1 Facts
A husband claimed he had divorced his wife years earlier by a talaq mentioned only in his written statement.
2 Issue
Is a mere plea of past talaq enough?
3 What the court decided
No. Talaq must be for a reasonable cause and preceded by attempts at reconciliation, and must be proved.
4 Why it matters
An early step against arbitrary talaq.
5 Think about it
How does this anticipate Shayara Bano?
6 Analyse it yourself
Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.
7 More cases on Family law
- ABC v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2015) 10 SCC 1
- Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur (2017) 8 SCC 746
- Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse (2014) 1 SCC 188
- Bai Tahira v. Ali Hussain Fidaalli Chothia (1979) 2 SCC 316
- Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha (2011) 1 SCC 141
- D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010) 10 SCC 469
All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz
← Shakti Vahini v. Union of IndiaShankari Prasad v. Union of India →
A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.