New Delhi/Agartala: The Supreme Court has sought the State of Tripura to reply to a public interest litigation that challenges a provision of the Jamatia Customary Laws Act, 2017, saying the clause permits settlement of serious offences including rape by payment of a fine.
Top court issues notice; hearing listed
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana condoned the delay in refiling the petition, issued notice and made the matter returnable on November 27, 2026. The court directed that the petition be tagged with Writ Petition (Civil) No. 88 of 2026. The Bench has not adjudicated on the merits.
| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| Petition | Madhumita Bhattacharya v. State of Tripura and Another |
| Challenged provision | Section 143, Jamatia Customary Laws Act, 2017 |
| Next listing | 27 November 2026 |
| Bench | CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, Justice V. Mohana |
What the petition contends
Filed through Advocate-on-Record Shoumendu Mukherji, the petition seeks a declaration that Section 143 is unconstitutional and asks the respondents to place all relevant records concerning the Act before the court. According to the petition, the provision allows an accused to avoid criminal consequences for grievous sexual offences by paying a fine of up to ₹1 lakh.
"[The provision] places a price tag on a woman's dignity," the petition states, arguing that it permits an accused to escape the consequences of grievous sexual violence by paying money.
The petitioner further asserts that the provision results in tribal women being denied equal protection of criminal law on the basis of geography and tribal affiliation, and that it undermines their dignity and bodily autonomy.
Argument on the Sixth Schedule
The petition raises a constitutional point about the scope of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution, which provides for administration of certain tribal areas and recognises customary practices in specified matters. The petitioner says the Sixth Schedule protects tribal culture, customary law and land rights, but does not permit customary bodies to override or create exceptions to national criminal law.
In those submissions, it is argued that Section 143, read with the Act’s penalty provisions, goes beyond the legislative powers conferred by the Sixth Schedule by creating a parallel mechanism for dealing with offences such as rape.
Issues for the court
The Supreme Court will be called on to consider whether the impugned provision:
- is compatible with fundamental rights under the Constitution, including equality before the law and protection of life and personal liberty;
- falls within the legislative competence afforded by the Sixth Schedule or, alternatively, impermissibly trenches on Union and State criminal law;
- results in differential treatment of victims on the basis of tribal affiliation or geographic area that is constitutionally impermissible.
The notice issued by the court at this stage does not indicate any view on these questions. The matter has been held not yet heard on merits and will return to the court on the date listed.
Context and possible implications
The Jamatia Customary Laws Act was enacted to recognise and regulate certain customary practices of the Jamatia community, one of the tribal groups in Tripura. The present challenge, however, raises broader questions about the interaction between customary dispute-resolution mechanisms and the criminal justice system.
If the court finds the provision unconstitutional, it could have implications for other statutory or customary arrangements in areas covered by the Sixth Schedule where traditional institutions exercise regulatory authority. Conversely, upholding the provision would require the court to address the limits of statutory recognition for customary law where it intersects with offences that attract penal consequences under national criminal statutes.
The State of Tripura and other respondents will now file their responses ahead of the next hearing. The Supreme Court’s decision to issue notice ensures the constitutional challenge will proceed through judicial scrutiny at the national level.
