SC suspends triple talaq for 6 months, asks Parliament to make a law

Agencies
August 22, 2017

New Delhi, Aug 22: In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court on Tuesday suspended the triple talaq verdict for the next six months with immediate effect. The top court also asked the Parliament to bring in the new law to govern the issue. Three out of five judges hearing the case have declared triple talaq as 'arbitary' and 'unconstitutional'.

A five-judge bench comprising of Chief Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar, Justice Kurian Joseph, Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice S Abdul Nazeer – all from different religious communities including Sikh, Christian, Parsi, Hindu and Muslim – heard seven pleas, including five separate petitions, filed by Muslim women challenging the prevalent practice of triple talaq in the community.

Uttarakhand-based Shayara Bano was the first to file a petition in the Supreme Court of India challenging the constitutional validity of Triple talaq.

Expressing happiness on the judgement, Bano told Zee News, “I know the law of triple talaq cannot end. But the Supreme Court has ended the practice. It's a great judgment for Muslim women across the country and for our future generation.”

She further added, “There is no mention of teen talaq in Quraon. It's a fabrication of the society.”

“I have not even seen my children in the last two-three years. I don't know what's happening to them. I hope no one goes through such tremendous mental pressure. Because of triple talaq, children are suffering physical and mental harassment,” said Bano.

“Triple Talaq is a violation to equlity and the dignity of a woman,” said Monika Arora, Supreme Court advocate.

The judges had reserved its verdict on May 18 after a six-day marathon hearing during the summer vacation.

The Chief Justice of India (CJI) J S Khehar, while reading the judgement, said that "talaq-e-biddat is not in violation of articles 14,15, 21 and 25 of the Constitution."

He further said the talaq-e-biddat is an integral part of Sunni community, which is being practiced for the last 1000 years.

During the hearing, the top court 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".

The Centre had told the bench that it introduce a new law to regulate the instant divorce practice among Muslims, if triple talaq is held invalid and unconstitutional by the top 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"

As the Centre sought to flag the issue of gender equality of Muslim women vis-a-vis women in other religions and in Islamic countries, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) asked it to bring a law taking recourse to Article 25 (2)(b) of the Constitution that permits enactment of law invoking social reforms.

However, AIMPLB had cautioned the constitution bench that "testing the validity of customs and practices was a slippery slope" and cautioned the bench that "testing the validity of customs and practices was a slippery slope".

In the course of the hearing, the AIMPLB issued an advisory to telling the qazis to give an option to Muslim women to opt out of instant triple talaq before giving consent for nikah.

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.

Comments

Close your eyes and think who created this, when i was close my eyes i can`t see anything and ask your creator to guide me in Right path , Don't blame Islam , blame yourself that you can`t identify your  creator.

Sangeeth
 - 
Tuesday, 22 Aug 2017

Dear Saleem, If you want to live in India, then you should follow Indian laws and rules. Any country like that only. I cant live in Saudi without following their rules. Modiji is doing right thing in that way...

Sandesh
 - 
Tuesday, 22 Aug 2017

True mr. unknown. "Islam not just a religion its a lifestlye for peaceful life BY DIVORCING WIFE VERBALLY JUST SAYING TALAQ"

Unknown
 - 
Tuesday, 22 Aug 2017

Islam not just a religion its a lifestlye for peaceful life

Saleem
 - 
Tuesday, 22 Aug 2017

SC cant decide our laws

Rakesh
 - 
Tuesday, 22 Aug 2017

Contradiction is in the case of PM

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 18,2020

Bengaluru, Mar 18: Karnataka Congress President DK Shivakumar on Wednesday met the Director-General of Police in Bengaluru and demanded police protection for Madhya Pradesh Congress MLAs and the removal of BJP workers from the hotel in Bengaluru, where the legislators are currently lodged.

"The (Madhya Pradesh) legislators have come here and have requested police protection, that is all. Let the police give them protection, our candidate (Digvijaya Singh) has come, let him meet the legislators. Why are BJP workers protecting them? We know that they are under threat and hence we need to vacate them (BJP workers)," Shivakumar told reporters here after the meeting.

"We will give protection to our men and that is why we are telling them they cannot stop us. They should be in a free and fair position. I have communicated to DGP that BJP needs to vacate," he added.

Earlier today, Congress' Rajya Sabha candidate from Madhya Pradesh and former chief minister Digvijaya Singh was placed under preventive arrest after he sat on a dharna near Ramada Hotel here, allegedly for not being allowed by police to meet the 21 Congress rebel MLAs lodged in a hotel.

"I am a Rajya Sabha candidate from Madhya Pradesh, voting is scheduled for March 26. My MLAs have been kept here, they want to speak to me, their phones have been snatched, the police is not letting me speak to them saying there is a security threat to MLAs," Singh told reporters.

Singh who sat on the dharna with a face mask on said: "We were expecting them to come back, but when we saw they're being held back, messages came from their families...I personally spoke to five MLAs, they said they're captive, phones snatched away, there is Police in front of every room. They're being followed 24/7," Singh said.

The development comes amid the political crisis in Madhya Pradesh after the exit of Jyotiraditya Scindia from the Congress party.

Scindia's departure was followed by 22 Congress MLAs resigning from the party as well as from the state legislative Assembly.

The resignation of these MLAs has left the Kamal Nath government below the majority mark.

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 web desk
June 16,2020

New Delhi, Jun 16: Despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi led government’s attempt to downplay the border dispute with China, matters have heated up unprecedentedly along the Line of Actual Control (LAC)- the effective Sino-India border in Eastern Ladakh. 

The country has lost three precious lives – an army officer and two soldiers. The last time blood was spilled on the LAC, before the latest episode, was 45 years ago when the Chinese ambushed an Assam Rifles patrol in Tulung La.

India had lost four soldiers on October 20, 1975 in Tulung La, the last time bullets were fired on the India-China border though both the countries witnessed bitter stand-offs later at Sumdorong Chu valley in 1987, Depsang in 2013, Chumar in 2014 and Doklam in 2017.

Between 1962 and 1975, the biggest clash between India and China took place in Nathu La pass in 1967 when reports suggest that around 80 Indian soldiers were killed and many more Chinese personnel.

While three soldiers, including a Commanding Officer, were killed in the latest episode in Galwan Valley, the government describes it as a "violent clash" and does not mention opening fire.

New Delhi described the locality where the 1975 incident took place as "well within" its territory only to be rebuffed by Beijing as "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong".

The Ministry of External Affairs had then said that the Chinese had crossed the LAC and ambushed the soldiers while Beijing claimed the Indians entered their territory and did not return despite warnings.

The Indian government maintained that the ambush on the Assam Rifles' patrol in 1975 took place "500 metres south of Tulung" on the border between India and Tibet and "therefore in Indian territory". It said Chinese soldiers "penetrating" Indian territory implied a "change in China's position" on the border question but the Chinese denied this and blamed India for the incident.

The US diplomatic cables quoted an Indian military intelligence officer saying that the Chinese had erected stone walls on the Indian side of Tulung La and from these positions fired several hundred rounds at the Indian patrol.

"Four of the Indians had gone into a leading position while two (the ones who escaped) remained behind. The senior military intelligence officer emphasised that the soldiers on the Indian patrol were from the area and had patrolled that same region many times before," the cable said.

One of the US cables showed that former US Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger sought details of the October 1975 clash "without approaching the host governments on actual location of October 20 incident". He also wanted to know what ground rules were followed regarding the proximity of LAC by border patrols.

A cable sent from the US mission in India on November 4, 1975 appeared to have doubts about the Chinese account saying it was "highly defensive".

"Given the unsettled situation on the sub-continent, particularly in Bangladesh, both Chinese and Indian authorities have authorised stepped up patrols along the disputed border. The clash may well have ensued when two such patrols unexpectedly encountered each other," it said.

Another cable from China on the same day quoted another October 1974 cable, which spoke about Chinese officials being concerned for long that "some hotheaded person on the PRC (People's Republic of China) might provoke an incident that could lead to renewed Sino-Indian hostilities. It went on to say that this clash suggested that "such concerns and apprehensions are not unwarranted".

According to the United States diplomatic cables, Chinese Foreign Ministry on November 3, 1975 disputed the statement of the MEA spokesperson, who said the incident took place inside Indian territory.

The Chinese had said "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong". In its version of the 1975 incident, they said Indian troops crossed the LAC at 1:30 PM at Tulung Pass on the Eastern Sector and "intruded" into their territory when personnel at the Civilian Checkpost at Chuna in Tibet warned them to withdraw.

Ignoring this, they claimed, Indian soldiers made "continual provocation and even opened fire at the Chinese civilian checkpost personnel, posing a grave threat to the life of the latter. The Chinese civilian checkpost personnel were obliged to fire back in self defence."

The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson had also said they told the Indian side that they could collect the bodies "anytime" and on October 28, collected the bodies, weapons and ammunition and "signed a receipt".

The US cables from the then USSR suggested that the official media carried reports from Delhi on the October 1975 incident and they cited only Indian accounts of the incident "ridiculing alleged Chinese claims that the Indians crossed the line and opened fire first".

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 8,2020

Bengaluru, Jun 8: Facing a shortage of labour, some top builders in the city have initiated efforts to bring back the migrant workers, who have returned to their native places following the COVID-19 lockdown, and are holding parleys with Railway authorities for operation of special trains to ferry them.

After the lockdown was announced, many construction projects came to a halt and accordingly the labourers were rendered jobless. These migrant workers preferred to go back to their home state as they were not paid when the projects were stopped and were caught in the big financial mess. Many of these migrants even chose to cover thousands of kilometres by foot when even trains, buses or any motor vehicles were not operating.

Keeping their woes in view, the Centre decided to run the Shramik Special trains to ferry them to their native places. But, after they were gone, the builders found themselves in a lurch. An executive of a builder told PTI "Yes, our builder and a few others are in talks with the Railways to run the special train to bring back the labourers." She said nothing has been materialised as of now.

According to her, the builders took the contact numbers of the workers when they left the city to their home states and are now contacting them one by one. The South Western Railway has so far sent 3.11 lakh migrant workers in 216 Shramik Special trains starting from May 3 to June 6.

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.