Triple talaq: Personal laws can't be rewritten, Muslim board tells SC

September 3, 2016

New Delhi, Sep 3: The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on Friday told the Supreme Court that “personal laws cannot be re-written in the name of social reforms.”

talaq3

Submitting its response in connection with the ongoing matter on the triple talaq' issue, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board said, “Personal laws cannot be challenged as violative of Part III of the Constitution.”

“When serious discords develop in a marriage and husband wants to get rid of wife, legal compulsions and time consuming judicial process….in extreme cases husband may resort to illegal criminal ways of getting rid of her by murdering her. In such situations Triple Talaq is a better recourse,” AIMPLB told the apex court.

“Marriage is a contract in which both parties are not physically equal. Male is stronger and female is a weaker sex. Securing separation through court takes a long time deters prospects of remarriage,” it added.

The AIMPLB further said that polygamy as a social practice is not for gratifying men's lust, but it is a social need.

“Muslim women have right to divorce under Khula practice. Issues of Muslim Personal Law are raised in the Supreme Court are for Parliament for decide. The Uniform Civil code is a directive principle and not enforceable. The personal laws are protected by Article 25, 26 and 29 of the Constitution as they are acts done in pursuance of a religion,” it added.

The apex court had last week issued notice to the Central Government on the plea of a Muslim woman challenging the Constitutional validity of triple talaq' to end a marriage.

The petitioner Ishrat Jahan has sought a declaration from the apex court, saying that Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, was unconstitutional as it violated fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 (equality), 15 (non-discrimination), 21 (life) and 25 (religion) of the Constitution.

In her petition, Jahan has asked whether an arbitrary and unilateral divorce through triple talaq can deprive the wife of her rights in her matrimonial home as also her right to have the custody of her children.

A batch of petitions is being heard by a bench headed by Chief Justice T.S. Thakur and notices have already been issued to the All India Muslim Personal Law Board and others.

However, this is not the first such type of petition that has been presented before the Supreme Court as Uttarakhand-based Shayara Banu and the Rashtrawadi Muslim Mahila Sangh through its president Farah Faiz have raised similar queries.

On July 29, the apex court had favoured a wider debate on the petitions challenging the validity of triple talaq.

All India Muslim Women Personal Law Board (AIMWPLB) president Shaista Ambar has demanded abolishing of the triple talaq system.

Talaq-e-bidat is a Muslim man divorcing his wife by pronouncing the word “talaq” more than once in a single tuhr (the period between two menstruations) or in a tuhr after coitus or pronouncing an irrevocable instantaneous divorce at one go (unilateral triple-talaq).

The Centre has set up a high-level committee to review the status of women in India and according to reports has recommended a ban on the practice of oral, unilateral and triple talaq (divorce) and polygamy.

Comments

SK
 - 
Monday, 5 Sep 2016

The Muslim Personal Law board is putting up silly / childish / stupid arguements as follows

\ In extreme cases husband may resort to illegal criminal ways of getting rid of her by killing her \".
If that happens, that is good, The innocent wife will go to Jannah and the criminal husband will go to jail and Hell.

The million dollar question is ....why the husband can not give the talaqs step by step as ordained by Quran ... and wait for 9 months instead of telling 3 talaqs at a time .??????????"

SK
 - 
Sunday, 4 Sep 2016

Shaji, further to my previous question, kindly note that , no one is opposing the Personal Law... It is because of the wrong practice by Muslim Husbands, Islam is getting a bad name.... Why the Husbands are in a hurry to give three talaqs at a time.. which is not allowed in Quran .... Why cant the greedy husbands give the Talaq step by step..... wait for three months after the first Talak, wait another 3 months after the second Talak, So within 8 -9 months , the process of Talak will be over and the women can not complaint... Why phones, E.mails, messages , skypes are used to give talak.....It is the greedy and name sake husbands, who have given a chance to these ladies to go to courts.... If the husbands BEHAVE properly , the chances of differences are less.... and unfortunately some greedy moulanas are also supporting these erring husbands .... Just think, if it happens to your sisters and daughters, then you will understand the PAIN and wrongful act...

SK
 - 
Sunday, 4 Sep 2016

Mr Shaji..... Kindly tell what the Quran tells about Talaq and how it was practised during the time of Prophet ( PBUH )

SHAJI
 - 
Sunday, 4 Sep 2016

Why the hate mongers are inserting their nose in personal matter of Muslims. Few moderate muslims are behind this agitation as they dont want to follow islam. In this case why are they call themselves Muslims. They are free to follow any religion. None is forcing these hypocrytes to be in Islam. Tomorrow these hypocrytes (Munafiqs) will ask to ban Masjids / prayers / fastings etc as they are not following it and face it hard to observe it. Supreme court should not accept such requestes which is only a waste of time of Court. Few sangh partivar terrorists and hate mongers are supporting these hypocrites. Why media is showing hand count hypocrite wormen who want changes in personal law whereas yuo will find hudreds of thousand of muslim women who dont want any change in muslim persona law which is based on Quaran plus Hadees and will never be changed.

Shamsir
 - 
Saturday, 3 Sep 2016

No brother its not allowed.when serious discords happens in marriage(its always better to make patience). Husband can go for 1st talaq by keeping two pious negotiator from each side. during that time women should stay at husbands house but they should b away from bed so that through negotiators counselling there is a chance for mind change with in women's first menstrual period. in case problem still continues then he can go for second talaq and same procedure to follow. Initial two talaq are revocable but so in third case it is irrecoverable ... for more information go through mufthi menk's latest 2016 talk in youtube \marriage issue\""

SK
 - 
Saturday, 3 Sep 2016

Manoharji , Before making this comment have you consulted your Father Advani / Modi / Muthalik / Pagodia / Moochwala .......Good luck enjoy the day ....

Manohar
 - 
Saturday, 3 Sep 2016

Ask with your father owaisis he always talk about law everytime to escape the situation now u people are saying that supreme court cant take decision on your personal values.

SK
 - 
Saturday, 3 Sep 2016

Is triple talaq in one time is allowed in Quran / Prophet ( PBUH ) ????

Any one can enlighten ????

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com news network
February 14,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 25,2020

Bengaluru, May 25: The 36-hour marathon lockdown call given by Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa, passed off peacefully with people opting to remain inside their houses and cooperate with the state government to fight against spread of deadly Covid-19.

Though the call was only for 24 hours from 7 am (Sunday) to 7 am (Monday) another 12 hours was added to it as the night curfew was already in force from 7 pm on Saturday and the next day (Sunday) it continued till Monday up to 7 am.

Autorickshaws and bus service were off the road giving a tough time to people arriving from neighbouring places reach home that too during the night. Adding to their woes was heavy rain that lashed the city for more than two hours on Sunday evening flooding the streets.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 29,2020

Chamaranagara, Mar 29: As many as 595 Tamil Nadu-based fishermen, who were working in Mangaluru, crossed the Karnataka border and reached their state via Chamarajanagar on Saturday.

Police said following the lockdown, the fishermen had left Mangaluru in more than 20 vehicles. The fishermen crossed the Karnataka border through Punajur check-post. However, the vehicles returned after dropping them near Hasanur check-post in Tamil Nadu.

As the fishermen had no proper documents, they were stopped by Tamil Nadu Police. However, the police allowed them after screening. The Tamil Nadu government arranged vehicles to ferry them, said a police officer.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.