Case Analysis Of Githa Hariharan V. Reserve Bank Of India
- IJLLR Journal
- Apr 26
- 1 min read
Upkar Chaudhary, Symbiosis Law School, Noida
ABSTRACT
The leading precedent of Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India gave a new meaning to the interpretation of Section 6(a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred as, HMGA) which unequivocally mentions who can be the “natural guardian” of a Hindu minor. Previously according to this section of HMGA father of a minor was considered the natural guardian of a minor. Furthermore, it mentions "and after him" i.e. after the father, mother of that minor would be regarded as his/her lawful guardian. In 1995, Mrs. Githa Hariharan, a prominent author and mother of a minor son, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of Constitution of India before the hon’ble Supreme Court of India, against the discriminatory interpretation of this provision.
This paper attempts to critically analyse this judgement of hon’ble Supreme Court and discuss its effects on the society at large by meticulously analysing the arguments advanced by the petitioner and respondent. Furthermore, through a detailed analysis of statutory provisions, judicial reasoning, and relevant case laws, the paper explores how the hon’ble Supreme Court adopted a purposive interpretation to align personal law with constitutional morality.
