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.
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
March 6,2020

Bengaluru, Mar 6: School children in Karnataka will have 'bag-free' days on two Saturdays in a month as part of efforts to create a joyful learning experience, Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa announced on Thursday. By making two Saturdays in a month as bag-free days, "Sambhrama Shanivara" will be observed with the objective of creating a joyful learning experience by reducing the burden of text books, he said, presenting the 2020-21 budget in the state assembly.

"The main purpose of such days is to create awareness, by means of activities, on topics that are necessary for students to be ideal citizens," he added.

He also said for the first time in the history of the state his government presented a "child budget", making it a special feature of the budget.

All the policies and programmes for the development of children below the age of 18 are consolidated and presented in this budget and as many as 279 programmes involving Rs.36,340crore, which is 15.28 per cent of the total volume of the Budget, have been earmarked.

English medium of instruction would be given along with Urdu in 400 government Urdu schools and Rs one crore will be provided during 2020-21 for this purpose, Mr Yediyurappa said.

For the education of children of auto drivers, up to Rs 2,000 would be provided annually to each family. For this purpose, Rs 40 crore will be provided in the coming fiscal, the Chief Minister added.

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 18,2020

New Delhi, Jun 18: Reliance Industries Ltd on Thursday said it has sold a 2.32 per cent stake in its digital unit to Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund (PIF) for Rs 11,367 crore, taking the cumulative fund raising to about Rs 1.16 lakh crore in two months.

Starting with Facebook Inc on April 22, Reliance has sold almost 25 per cent of equity in Jio Platforms - the maximum reports suggest the company intends to dilute to financial investors.

The investment by Saudi sovereign wealth fund is "at an equity value of Rs 4.91 lakh crore and an enterprise value of Rs 5.16 lakh crore", the company said in a statement.

With this investment, Jio Platforms has raised Rs 115,693.95 crore from some of the leading global investment powerhouses at a time when the world is deeply impacted by the coronavirus pandemic, resulting in a recession kind of environment for the global economy.

"With the addition of PIF's investment, Jio Platforms has established partnerships with a marquee set of global financial investors, who will contribute to establishing the Digital Society vision for India," the statement said.

Jio Platforms houses India's biggest telecom firm by subscribers, Reliance Jio. With more than 388 million users, Jio has forced out several rivals and driven consolidation in the sector since entering the market in 2016 with free voice services and cut-price data.

Over the past two months, billionaire Mukesh Ambani's oil-to-telecom conglomerate has announced the sale of about $14 billion of assets, completed a Rs 53,124 crore rights issue and slowed the run rate of new investment by a quarter.

These will help Reliance meet its target of paying off Rs 1.61 lakh crore of net debt by the end of the year.
This is PIF's largest investment into the Indian economy to date.

Ambani, chairman and managing director of Reliance Industries, said, "We at Reliance have enjoyed a long and fruitful relationship with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for many decades. From oil economy, this relationship is now moving to strengthen India's New oil (data-driven) economy, as is evident from PIF's investment into Jio Platforms."

Yasir Al-Rumayyan, governor of PIF, commented: "We are delighted to be investing in an innovative business which is at the forefront of the transformation of the technology sector in India. We believe that the potential of the Indian digital economy is very exciting and that Jio Platforms provides us with an excellent opportunity to gain access to that growth."

"This investment will also enable us to generate significant long-term commercial returns for the benefit of Saudi Arabia's economy and our country's citizens, in line with our mandate to safeguard and grow the national wealth of the Kingdom," he said.

The transaction is subject to Indian regulatory and other customary approvals.

Morgan Stanley acted as financial advisor to Reliance Industries and AZB & Partners and Davis Polk & Wardwell acted as legal counsels.

Prior to this deal, Reliance had sold 22.38 per cent of Jio Platforms to investors including Facebook Inc, securing Rs 104,326.95 crore in eight weeks.

Facebook kicked off the party, investing Rs 43,573.62 crore for a 9.99 per cent stake on April 22. This was closely followed by a further Rs 60,753.33 crore in investment.

Silver Lake - the world's largest tech investor - bought a 1.15 per cent stake in Jio Platforms for Rs 5,665.75 crore on May 4. It invested another Rs 4,546.80 crore for additional 0.93 per cent stake on June 5, taking its total holding to 2.08 per cent
Private equity KKR and Vista Equity Partners have taken 2.32 per cent stake each for Rs 11,367 crore apiece. KKR invested in Jio Platforms on May 22 while Vista invested on May 8.

Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund Mubadala Investment Co picked up 1.85 per cent in Jio Platforms for Rs 9,093.60 crore on June 5. Abu Dhabi Investment Authority on June 7 invested Rs 5,683.50 crore for a 1.16 per cent stake in Jio Platforms.

On May 17, global equity firm General Atlantic picked up 1.34 per cent stake in Jio Platforms for Rs 6,598.38 crore.

Global investment firm TPG on June 13 picked up 0.93 per cent for Rs 4,546.80 crore while L Catterton bought 0.39 per cent for Rs 1,894.50 crore.

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.