{"url":"https://www.livelaw.in/know-the-law/justice-narimans-revival-of-doctrine-of-manifest-arbitrariness-to-strike-down-legislation-150312#:~:text=The%20doctrine%20of%20manifest%20arbitrariness%20is%20a,Irrational%20*%20Without%20an%20adequate%20determining%20principle","title":"Justice Nariman's Revival of Manifest Arbitrariness Doctrine","domain":"livelaw.in","imageUrl":"https://images.pexels.com/photos/34816946/pexels-photo-34816946.jpeg?auto=compress&cs=tinysrgb&h=650&w=940","pexelsSearchTerm":"Indian courtroom","category":"Politics","language":"en","slug":"8f7e417f","id":"8f7e417f-269d-48bc-a9be-dcc602d4836c","description":"Justice Nariman revived the doctrine of manifest arbitrariness in Shayara Bano (2017) to strike down triple talaq as violative of Article 14.","summary":"## TL;DR\n- Justice Nariman revived the doctrine of manifest arbitrariness in **Shayara Bano** (2017) to strike down triple talaq as violative of Article 14.\n- The doctrine tests if legislation is capricious, irrational, or lacks adequate determining principle, extended to plenary laws.\n- It equips courts to invalidate drastically unreasonable statutes, upholding equality under the Constitution.[[1]](https://www.livelaw.in/know-the-law/justice-narimans-revival-of-doctrine-of-manifest-arbitrariness-to-strike-down-legislation-150312)\n\n## The story at a glance\nThe article examines how **Justice R.F. Nariman** advanced the doctrine of manifest arbitrariness to challenge legislation under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. It credits him for applying it in **Shayara Bano v. Union of India** (2017) and notes subsequent uses in cases like **Navtej Singh Johar** and **Joseph Shine**. Published on **LiveLaw** in late **2019** amid evolving Supreme Court jurisprudence on equality, it reflects ongoing debates on judicial review of laws.[[1]](https://www.livelaw.in/know-the-law/justice-narimans-revival-of-doctrine-of-manifest-arbitrariness-to-strike-down-legislation-150312)[[2]](https://www.livelaw.in/know-the-law/justice-narimans-revival-of-doctrine-of-manifest-arbitrariness-to-strike-down-legislation-150312#:~:text=The%20doctrine%20of%20manifest%20arbitrariness%20is%20a,Irrational%20*%20Without%20an%20adequate%20determining%20principle)\n\n## Key points\n- Manifest arbitrariness allows courts to strike down laws that are **drastically unreasonable**, capricious, irrational, or without adequate determining principle, as defined by Justice Nariman.[[1]](https://www.livelaw.in/know-the-law/justice-narimans-revival-of-doctrine-of-manifest-arbitrariness-to-strike-down-legislation-150312)\n- Originated in **Shayara Bano** (2017), where the Court invalidated instant triple talaq under the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, by a 3:2 majority.[[3]](https://clsnluo.com/2025/11/04/doctrine-of-manifest-arbitrariness-moving-towards-a-wider-reasonableness-review-part-i)\n- Affirmed in **Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India** (2019), upholding the Insolvency Code but confirming the doctrine's scope against plenary legislation.[[4]](https://www.livelaw.in/columns/justice-rohinton-narimans-legacy-notable-judgments-on-liberties-orientation-to-ibc-arbitration-nrc-179422)\n- Applied in **Navtej Singh Johar** (2018) to decriminalize consensual same-sex acts under Section 377 IPC, deeming it capricious.[[5]](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/168671544)\n- Used in **Joseph Shine** (2018) to strike down adultery provisions (Section 497 IPC) as arbitrary and outdated.[[6]](https://lawjurist.com/index.php/2024/08/14/the-evolving-landscape-of-article-14-recent-interpretations-and-applications)\n- The article highlights a \"latest example\" of the doctrine striking down a provision, though specifics are not detailed in available excerpts.[[1]](https://www.livelaw.in/know-the-law/justice-narimans-revival-of-doctrine-of-manifest-arbitrariness-to-strike-down-legislation-150312)\n\n## Details and context\nJustice Nariman first elaborated the doctrine in his concurring opinion in *Shayara Bano*, overruling prior hesitations like in *State of A.P. v. McDowell* (1996) that limited arbitrariness challenges to executive actions. He argued it applies to legislation if \"manifest,\" distinguishing it from mere unreasonableness to respect legislative deference.[[7]](https://www.livelaw.in/columns/justice-rf-nariman-tripletalaq-constitutionalty-of-section-377-ipc-state-of-ap-v-mcdowell-co-180291)\n\nPost-*Shayara Bano*, the Supreme Court upheld the doctrine in *Swiss Ribbons* while validating the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, clarifying it targets only glaring flaws without usurping policy choices. Cases like *Navtej Johar* and *Joseph Shine* show its use against discriminatory personal laws rooted in patriarchal norms, prioritizing constitutional morality over social stereotypes.[[8]](https://ijlmh.com/wp-content/uploads/Revival-of-Doctrine-of-Manifest-Arbitrariness.pdf)\n\nThe doctrine balances judicial restraint with robust Article 14 review, but draws criticism for vagueness and potential overreach into legislative domain.\n\n## Key quotes\n> \"Manifest arbitrariness, therefore, must be something done by the legislature capriciously, irrationally and/or without adequate determining principle.\"  \n> — Justice R.F. Nariman in *Shayara Bano v. Union of India* (2017)[[4]](https://www.livelaw.in/columns/justice-rohinton-narimans-legacy-notable-judgments-on-liberties-orientation-to-ibc-arbitration-nrc-179422)\n\n## Why it matters\nThe doctrine strengthens Article 14 as a tool against discriminatory or irrational laws, promoting substantive equality in India's constitutional framework. For lawyers, judges, and citizens challenging statutes, it offers a direct test beyond traditional classification, as seen in personal law reforms. Watch how future benches refine its boundaries amid debates on judicial activism, especially in politically sensitive legislation.[[9]](https://www.barandbench.com/columns/manifest-arbitrariness-and-plenary-legislation)","hashtags":["#law","#india","#constitution","#judiciary","#supremecourt","#article14"],"sources":[{"url":"https://www.livelaw.in/know-the-law/justice-narimans-revival-of-doctrine-of-manifest-arbitrariness-to-strike-down-legislation-150312#:~:text=The%20doctrine%20of%20manifest%20arbitrariness%20is%20a,Irrational%20*%20Without%20an%20adequate%20determining%20principle","title":"Original article"},{"url":"https://clsnluo.com/2025/11/04/doctrine-of-manifest-arbitrariness-moving-towards-a-wider-reasonableness-review-part-i","title":""},{"url":"https://www.livelaw.in/columns/justice-rohinton-narimans-legacy-notable-judgments-on-liberties-orientation-to-ibc-arbitration-nrc-179422","title":""},{"url":"https://indiankanoon.org/doc/168671544","title":""},{"url":"https://lawjurist.com/index.php/2024/08/14/the-evolving-landscape-of-article-14-recent-interpretations-and-applications","title":""},{"url":"https://www.livelaw.in/columns/justice-rf-nariman-tripletalaq-constitutionalty-of-section-377-ipc-state-of-ap-v-mcdowell-co-180291","title":""},{"url":"https://ijlmh.com/wp-content/uploads/Revival-of-Doctrine-of-Manifest-Arbitrariness.pdf","title":""},{"url":"https://www.barandbench.com/columns/manifest-arbitrariness-and-plenary-legislation","title":""}],"viewCount":2,"publishedAt":"2026-04-15T07:50:19.080Z","createdAt":"2026-04-15T07:50:19.080Z","articlePublishedAt":"2019-11-30T12:42:09.000Z"}