Triple Talaq ruled illegal by SC till Parliament brings new law

RSTV Bureau
File Photo of Supreme Court of India building in New Delhi.

File Photo of Supreme Court of India building in New Delhi.

The Supreme Court has for six months barred the practice of ‘triple talaq’ among Muslims, till the time Parliament brings in the law. In a majority 3:2 verdict, the 5-judge bench asked the government to come out with a legislation on ‘triple talaq.’

After reading separate judgments, the court declared the practice void and illegal. The court expressed hope that the government’s legislation will take into account the concerns of Muslim bodies and Sharia law.

The court also asks political parties to keep their differences aside and help Centre in bringing out the new legislation.

While delivering the order the court also observed that if some ISlamic countries were able to abolish triple talalq, independent India should not have a problem to get rid of it.

The apex court also ruled that if law doesn’t come in force in six months, then SC’s injunction on triple talaq will continue.

A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar had reserved its verdict on May 18 after a six-day marathon hearing during the summer vacation. Besides CJI Khehar, the bench also included Justices Kurian Joseph, R F Nariman, U U Lalit and S Abdul Nazeer.

During the hearing, the apex court had clarified that it may not deliberate upon the issue of polygamy and said it would only examine whether triple talaq was part of an “enforceable” fundamental right to practice religion by the Muslims.

The bench, made up of judges from different religious communities – Sikh, Christian, Parsi, Hindu and Muslim, had heard seven pleas, including five separate petitions filed by Muslim women challenging the prevalent practice of ‘triple talaq’ in the community.

The petitioners had claimed that the practice of ‘triple talaq’ was unconstitutional. The Muslim women, who had filed the petitions, have challenged the practice of ‘triple talaq’ in which the husband pronounces ‘talaq’ thrice in one go, sometimes even by phone or a text message, to get a divorce.

During the hearing, the apex court had observed that the practice of ‘triple talaq’ was the “worst” and “not a desirable” form of dissolution of marriage among Muslims, even though there were schools of thought which called it “legal”.

Several lawyers including noted jurist Ram Jethmalani had attacked the practice on various constitutional grounds including the right to equality and termed it “abhorrent”.

The Centre had told the bench that it will come out with a law to regulate marriage and divorce among Muslims if ‘triple talaq’ is held invalid and unconstitutional by the apex court. The government had termed all the three forms of divorce among the Muslim community – talaq-e-biddat, talaq hasan and talaq ahsan, as “unilateral” and “extra-judicial”.

It has said that all personal laws must be in confirmity with the Constitution and rights of marriage, divorce, property and succession has to be treated in the same class and has to be in conformity with the Constitution.

The Centre had said ‘triple talaq’ is neither integral to Islam, nor a “majority versus minority” issue but rather an “intra- community tussle” between Muslim men and deprived women.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), had equated the issue of ‘triple talaq’ with the belief that Lord Rama was born in Ayodhya and these were matters of faith which cannot be tested on grounds of constitutional morality.

He had argued that triple talaq has been there since 637 AD and cannot be termed as un-Islamic as Muslims have been practising it for last 1,400 years. Sibal had said that either Parliament can enact a law or it should be left to the community itself to deal and the court should not interfere on the issue.

The apex court during the hearing had asked the AIMPLB whether a woman can be given an option of saying ‘no’ to triple talaq at the time of execution of ‘nikahnama’ (marriage contract). It had asked Muslim bodies how a practice like triple talaq could be a matter of “faith” when they have been asserting that it is “patriarchal”, “bad in theology” and “sinful”.

The batch of pleas had also challenged the constitutional validity of other practices like ‘nikah halala’ and polygamy among Muslims.

The bench had taken up the main matter on its own as a petition titled “Muslim Women’s quest for equality”.

The apex court had on its own taken cognizance of the question whether Muslim women faced gender discrimination in the event of divorce or due to other marriages of their husbands.

(With inputs from PTI)