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
February 19,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 19: A public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Karnataka High Court, seeking a stay on Anand Singh functioning as Minister of Forests, Environment and Ecology contending that there are criminal cases filed against him by the Ministry.

"A stay be granted prohibiting Anand Singh from functioning as the Cabinet Minister for the Ministry of Forests, Environment and Ecology. Any other order that the Honourable Court may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity," the PIL prays.

The petition, filed by advocate Vijay Kumar, said that the Chief Minister has allocated the portfolio of the Ministry of Forests, Environment and Ecology to Singh without considering the fact that there are several criminal faces filed against him by the Ministry.

It said that the allocation of the Ministry of Forests, Environment and Ecology portfolio to Singh is in the conflict of interest.

"The holding of the post of Cabinet minister for the Ministry of Forests, Environment and Ecology is against public interest and completely in conflict of interest as he has business for which the subject Ministry is the overseeing authority and further he will also have access to the case files which again is in conflict of interest," the PIL said.

PIL adds that "it is pertinent and absolutely necessary" to deny the incumbent from accessing files related to his cases and from taking any decisions which may provide him with pecuniary benefits through his businesses.

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
January 1,2020

Mangaluru, Jan 1: Karnataka Home Minister Basavaraj Bommai said here on Tuesday that the State government will think about making policy on giving compensation to the families of those who have died in police firing.

Speaking to newsmen here on Tuesday, he said that the government withholding compensation to the families of two persons who died in police firing in the city on December 19 after a protest against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act turned violent and even in 2006 when two persons had died in police firing at Mulky in Dakshina Kannada the then State government had not given any compensation to their families.

In the latest case, the First Information Report (FIR) has named the two persons who had died in the firing as the accused. After the incident, there were demands to provide compensation to the families of the victims.

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 16,2020

New Delhi, June 16: Tensions along the Line of Control border between India and China have spiked with an Indian army officer and two soldiers killed in the Galwan area of Ladakh, the Indian army said in a statement on Tuesday.

This is the first time in decades that a clash involving casualties has taken place on the 3,488 kilometre border between India and China.

"During the de-escalation process underway in the Galwan Valley, a violent face-off took place yesterday night with casualties. The loss of lives on the Indian side includes an officer and two soldiers. Senior military officials of the two sides are currently meeting at the venue to defuse the situation," said an official statement.

The two sides had made headway in talks last week with army chief General MM Naravane saying disengagement was in progress. The development had come after weeks of tension, including an incident in which patrolling soldiers from the two sides came to blows on the banks of Pangong Lake, resulting in injuries.

The two armies have since thinned out some forces in a positive signal but soldiers, tanks and other armoured carriers remained heavily deployed in the high-altitude region, an official had said.

India and China fought a brief border war in 1962 and have not been able to settle their border despite two decades of talks. Both claim thousands of kilometres of territory and patrols along the undemarcated Line of Actual Control - the de-facto border - often run into each other, leading to tensions. 

Comments

Angry Indian
 - 
Tuesday, 16 Jun 2020

where is our angry desh bakth RSS and sanghi...hiding in rat hole or @%#hole...now you can show your 56 inch chest to chinese...when pakistan destroyed our two fighter jet that time i relised we are making an monkey army not indian army...still time exist, still we have courage army...but we lack leader...we have maron PM...and some dog follower..they only know to bark in media and whatsapp...in reality they are just real na pustak...

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.