Declining birthrate makes two-child penalty obsolete in India, Supreme Court says
A view of the High Court in New Delhi. File | Photo credit: Reuters
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (Nov 4, 2026) ruled that laws that penalize more than two children have lost their relevance due to India’s declining birth rate.
“We are of the firm opinion that the laws that penalize having more than two children have lost their relevance. The basis of these laws, namely the fear of overpopulation, has disintegrated due to demographic changes in the last few decades,” the bench headed by Justice PS Narasimha said in a 37-page judgement.
The court said its 2003 judgment (in Javed v State of Haryana) which upheld such criminal laws required review by a larger bench. India’s total fertility rate (TFR) fell from 3.02 to 1.9. A TFR of 2.1, known as the replacement ratio, would allow one generation to completely replace itself.
“Even if India’s population is not yet declining, a fall in TFR below the replacement rate will soon lead to a demographic transition towards an older population with a declining proportion of the working-age population. Hence, laws aimed at limiting population growth have now lost their relevance,” Justice Narasimha observed.
The 2003 judgment in the Javed case referred to the situation that had existed in China since 2000 and drew inspiration from the measures it had taken to control the population.
Justice Narasimha said the decades-old view that population explosion is an obstacle to progress is outdated.
Healthy growth
“The earlier notion that population is detrimental to development no longer holds. Rather than society and courts dwelling on the negative consequences of high population, they should instead focus on the need to promote healthy population growth,” said the judgment delivered by Justice Alok Aradhe.
The judgment pointed out that the proportion of people aged 60 and over had already risen from around 8.3% in 2014 to 9.7% in 2024, and government projections put the proportion at almost 15% by 2036.
According to the court, India’s declining birth rate would necessarily mean a smaller proportion of younger people in the future, and thus a greater aging population. She said the issue had been of great concern in recent years.
The court said that failure to take note of demographic changes would only have serious consequences for India. Non-adjustment caused not only injustice but also abuse of power.
The judgment was based on a petition filed by Mangala Bhimrao Ingle, whose election as Sarpanch of Kakoda gram panchayat in Maharashtra was canceled on the grounds that she had more than two children. Lower courts and state authorities found that she gave birth to a third child in 2014 but still contested and won the panchayat elections in 2022. They ruled that she had acted in violation of Section 14(1)(a). j-1) of the Maharashtra Village Act, 1959 which upheld the norm of two children.
Justice Narasimha found such laws linking motherhood with political representation violative of Article 21 (right to life) of the Constitution.
“Allowing such laws to stand excludes an entire class of citizens from political representation for reasons that have little rational connection with their ability to hold public office. It forces an unreasonable choice between childbearing and democratic participation, impinging on the right to reproductive autonomy under Article 21,” Justice Narasimha observed.
Seeking to immediately revisit the 2003 Javed judgment, the court allowed the petitioner to continue as the elected Sarpanch of Kakoda gram panchayat while any proceedings against her were stayed.
Published – 04 Nov 2026 19:20 IST