Tradition on Trial

India’s matrimonial jurisprudence stands at the intersection of tradition, religion, and constitutionalism. Hindu and Muslim personal laws—two dominant frameworks governing marriage—differ fundamentally in their conception of the institution: the former venerates it as a sacramental and indissoluble bond, while the latter treats it as a civil contract based on consent and enforceable obligations. Despite statutory reforms, both systems continue to reflect patriarchal structures that constrain women’s autonomy and entrench gendered hierarchies within the marital relationship. This paper undertakes a comparative doctrinal analysis of Hindu and Muslim marriage laws, with a specific focus on the rights and duties of spouses concerning maintenance, divorce, and property. By situating these frameworks within the constitutional mandate of equality (Article 14), non-discrimination (Article 15), and dignity under the right to life (Article 21), the study interrogates the extent to which personal laws align—or fail to align—with India’s evolving constitutional morality. The analysis reveals deep structural tensions between religiously grounded personal law regimes and constitutional guarantees. While Hindu law sacralises marital duties in ways that often subordinate individual autonomy, Muslim law, despite its contractual nature, institutionalizes asymmetry through practices such as polygamy and unilateral divorce. The paper concludes by proposing a normative model of matrimonial rights and obligations that harmonizes cultural and religious diversity with constitutional values of justice, gender equality, and human dignity

Autonomy · Constitutional court · Constitutional law · Constitutional right · Dignity · Hinduism · Human rights · Jurisprudence · Normative · American Constitutional Law and Politics