Laws penalizing those having 2+ children have become irrelevant: SC
What's the story
The Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that laws penalizing families for having more than two children have become outdated, noting that fears of overpopulation are no longer valid as India's fertility rate has dropped from 3 to 1.9 in the past few decades. The court made the remarks while hearing a plea by former Maharashtra sarpanch Mangala Bhimrao Ingle, who was disqualified for having a third child.
Bench
'If we fail to take note of such demographic changes...'
"We are of the strong opinion that the laws that penalize having more than two children have lost their relevance. The foundation of such laws, that is the fear of overpopulation, has crumbled due to demographic changes," the court observed.
"So even though India's population is not yet declining, the total fertility rate falling below the replacement rate would soon result in...demographic transition to...older population."
"If we fail to take note of such demographic changes, India will face serious consequences."
Legal scrutiny
Laws violate reproductive autonomy: SC
"Further, it compels an unconscionable choice between bearing children and democratic participation, impinging upon reproductive autonomy under Article 21," the bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe said.
"Allowing such..law to stand excludes an entire class of citizens from political representation on grounds bearing little relevance or rational connection to their capacity to hold public office," they added.
It proceeded to stay proceedings under a Maharashtra law against the sarpanch and referred the matter to larger bench for reconsideration.
Demographic shift
Court cites decline in fertility rate
The case arose after Ingle was elected as sarpanch of gram panchayat Kakoda in Maharashtra.
A complaint was later filed alleging that she had incurred disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-1) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959, which bars those having more than two children from holding office of a panchayat member or sarpanch.
She was disqualified by the additional collector at Buldhana in October 2024, a decision upheld by the Bombay High Court in August 2025.
Policy review
Bench raises concerns about marginalized communities
Ingle then approached the SC, which called the policy "useless" during one of its hearings.
The court also questioned if similar two-child disqualification provisions continue to exist in other states and had directed the counsel to ascertain the position.
It asked advocate Rukmini Bobde (amicus curiae) and the petitioner's counsel, advocate Pratik Bombarde, to give a list of all state laws barring having more than two children.
After considering their submissions, the bench referred the matter to a larger bench.