Triple Talaq verdict: Centre won't rush to enact a new law

DHNS
August 22, 2017

New Delhi, Aug 22: The Centre is unlikely to rush into getting Parliament to pass a legislation following the Supreme Court's verdict declaring Islamic instant divorce law as arbitrary and unconstitutional.

Rather, the government will send an advisory to all States to ensure the compliance of the Supreme Court order on 'triple talaq', officials said.

As the law ministry officials put it, the SC's majority judgment has already made it clear that triple talaq is unconstitutional and illegal. 

Law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad said, "We will consider the issue in a structured manner but the prima facie reading of the judgment is that triple 'talaq' has been declared unconstitutional and illegal."

Minority affairs minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi said the Centre would not do what the Rajiv Gandhi government did to negate the apex Court's verdict in the Shah Bano case by passing the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. 

This nullified the SC's verdict in favour of granting Shah Bano maintenance from her ex-husband under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, with an upper limit of Rs. 500 per month.

From today onwards, if someone says triple talaq to a Muslim woman, it will not lead to divorce. Some amendments could be considered by the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 as this law covers the Muslim marriages, law officials said. 

During the hearing, the then Attorney General of India, Mukul Rohatgi had said that all forms of talaq must be abolished and if such a thing is done by the court, then the government will indeed enact a legislation to regulate Muslim divorces.

On Tuesday, Chief Justice JS Khehar and Justice S Abdul Nazeer were in favour of putting on hold for six months the practice of triple talaq and asking the government to come out with a law in this regard after taking into account progress made in Muslim Personal Law – 'Shariat', in various other Islamic countries.

But the majority judgement by Justices Kurian Joseph, RF Nariman and UU Lalit held it as violative of the Constitution. Justice Kurian Joseph, a part of the majority bench, went to the extent in stating that, “it is not for the Courts to direct for any legislation.”

Meanwhile, the top BJP leadership asked the party leaders to show restraint and not make it a religious issue. BJP spokespersons were told to treat it as a gender issue, related to equality of women.

Comments

Hasan
 - 
Wednesday, 23 Aug 2017

Talaq is a worst thing permited in islam and should be done in only rarest to rarest possible time. But few people misuse this for thier own  stupid benifits. Now if goverment will not pass the law and refer this judgement these people may follow our honourable prime ministers foot steps ( ie Abandon and go for others). In this case even bhakts also will not have a word to oppose.

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.
Agencies
June 25,2020

New Delhi, Jun 25: The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Centre and the CBSE to issue fresh notification in connection with Class 12 exams, clarifying the option between internal assessment and exams later.

The observation from the top court after it was informed that the CBSE has decided to cancel the remaining board exams for Class 10 and Class 12.

A bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjiv Khanna asked the Centre to clarify the issue of taking the option between internal assessment and exams later.

"Clarify the date of results," said the bench, noting that the CBSE will have to submit a fresh draft notification cancelling class 12 Board exams and affidavit on Friday morning, before the top court continues to hear the matter again at 10.30 a.m.

The apex court also sought clarity on the beginning of the new academic year.

It told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, that the CBSE is willing to conduct exams when the situation is conducive, but this may vary from state to state. "Will the decision be taken by a central authority or will the state government take the decision? How are you going to deal with that situation?"

Mehta replied that the decision must be taken according to the situation. To this, the bench said should not the solution be pan-India?

"You have not said when you will decide on this issue, and when you will take stock of these things. Some time frame will have to be given," noted the bench.

Continuing its queries, the bench said: "What about state regional board exams... the CBSE does not hold all the exams. The state Board is also there."

Mehta replied that the instructions from the controller of examinations are that exams are controlled centrally. "State boards assist the CBSE," he replied.

The bench observed that the government should modify the draft notification and include the state board issue. "Clear the stand that decision will be taken at the central level and not at the state level... other courses will have to be delayed till CBSE exam results come out," it said.

Mehta replied the assessment results will be published now, and if a student wants to opt to give the exam, then that will be conducted later. The top court asked Mehta to bring this on record and redraft the notification.

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.
Agencies
July 31,2020

New Delhi, Jul 31: With the highest single-day spike of 55,079 COVID-19 cases in the last 24 hours, India's coronavirus tally breached the 16 lakh mark on Friday, informed the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.

With this latest spike, the total cases in the country stand at 16,38,871. Among these cases 5,45,318 are active. A total of 10,57,806 patients have been cured/discharged/migrated.

779 deaths due to COVID-19 have been reported in the country in the last 24 hours, taking the death toll to 35,747.

As per the Union Health Ministry, Maharashtra has a total of 1,48,454 active cases and recorded 14,729 deaths due to COVID-19.
Tamil Nadu has a total of 57,962 active cases and 3,838 deaths in the state.

Delhi has a total of 10,743 active cases and 3,936 deaths.

The Indian Council of Medical Research on Friday informed that a total number of COVID-19 samples tested up to 30th July is 1,88,32,970 including 6,42,588 samples tested yesterday.

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.