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.
News Network
February 21,2020

New Delhi, Feb 21: A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the sedition case registered against a Karnataka school management for allegedly allowing students to stage an anti-CAA, anti-NRC drama that 'portrayed Prime Minister Narendra Modi in poor light'.

The petition seeks quashing of the FIR against the principal and other staff of the Shaheen School at Bidar who have been booked under sections 124-A (sedition) and 153-A (promoting enmity between different groups) of the Indian Penal Code.

In the petition filed on Thursday, social activist Yogita Bhayana has also sought an apex court direction for a proper mechanism to deal with alleged government misuse of the sedition law.

Section 124A of the IPC says that "whoever brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards... the Government shall be punished with imprisonment for life...".

Bhayana, in the plea, has sought a direction to the Centre and the Karnataka government "to quash the FIR registered in connection of seditious charges against the school management, teacher and a widowed parent of a student for staging a play criticizing CAA, NRC, and NPR."

The petition claimed the police "also questioned students, and videos and screenshots of CCTV footage showing them speaking to the students were shared widely on social media, prompting criticism."

It further quoted the school principal, alleging that "on one occasion, police in uniform questioned students, with no child welfare officials present".

The plea said that the "proceedings were violative of Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution and abuse of process of law."

"Issue an order directing the Centre to constitute a committee to scrutinise complaints under 124-A IPC and adhere to judgments by the apex court before registering the FIR under the section 124-A IPC," the petition said.

The drama was staged on January 21 by students of fourth, fifth and sixth standard.

The sedition case was filed based on a complaint from social worker Neelesh Rakshyal on January 26.

The complainant has alleged that the school authorities "used" the students to perform a drama where they "abused" Modi in the context of the Citizenship Amendment Act and the National Register of Citizens.

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.
coastaldigest.com news network
June 24,2020

Riyadh, June 24: Thousands of expatriates who managed to return to their home countries from Saudi Arabia during covid-19 lockdown are now in a dilemma as the Kingdom has clarified that it will not allow their re-entry till the end of the corona crisis. 

The Directorate General of Passports (Jawazat) announced on Tuesday that the mechanism to resume extension of the exit and re-entry visas for expatriates who are outside the Kingdom will be announced only after the end of the pandemic crisis.

The Jawazat stated this on its Twitter account while responding to queries from a number of expatriates who are currently outside the Kingdom and whose exit and re-entry visas have expired.

They inquired about the possibility of returning to the Kingdom after the resumption of international flight service. 

The Jawazat reiterated that the return of expatriates who left Saudi Arabia will be only after the end of the pandemic and in accordance with the process to obtain a valid re-entry visa.

The directorate said that in the event of any new decisions or instructions in this regard, they will be announced through the official channels.

It is noteworthy that the Jawazat had previously confirmed that its electronic services are continuing through the Absher and Muqeem online portals of the Ministry of Interior and that the service for messages and requests is still available and continuing through Absher for all the beneficiaries of its services.

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
June 4,2020

New Delhi, Jun 4: The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought response from Prajwal Revanna, the grandson of former Prime Minister HD Deve Gowda, on a plea challenging his election in 2019 from Hassan Lok Sabha constituency as a joint candidate of the Janata Dal Secular and the Congress.

A bench of Chief Justice SA Bobde and Justices AS Bopanna and Hrishiksh Roy issued notice to the returned candidate from the high-profile constituency on an appeal challenging the Karnataka High Court's order by which an election petition against his win was dismissed.

In the proceedings held through video-conferencing, the top court issued notice and tagged the appeal filed by G Devarajegowda for hearing with other similar pending plea filed by the BJP candidate on the issue.

Mr Devarajegowda in the plea said that his election petition was dismissed by the High Court on "procedural irregularities". The plea said that Mr Prajwal had resorted to unfair and corrupt practices and his election should be set aside.

It said the High Court did not consider the fact that by dismissing the election petition, it was running a risk of having a representative in parliament who has not got the maximum number of valid votes.

The petitioner, an advocate by profession, sought a declaration of rival BJP candidate, A Manju, as the winner for having secured the maximum number of valid votes.

A separate appeal was earlier filed by Mr Manju against the High Court order and the top court had already issued notice to the retuned candidate on that.

Mr Manju had challenged the 2019 election of Mr Prajwal on the ground that there was allegedly non-disclosure of assets held by him in his election affidavit.

Mr Prajwal was declared winner with 6,76,606 votes. Mr Manju came first runner-up with 5,35,282 votes.

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.