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.
Ram Puniyani
March 14,2020

In the wake of Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) UN High Commissioner, Michele Bachelet, has filed an intervention in the Supreme Court petition challenging the constitutionality of the Citizenship Amendment Act, as she is critical of CAA. Responding to her, India’s Foreign Minister S. Jai Shanker strongly rebutted her criticism, saying that the body (UNHCR) has been wrong and is blind to the problem of cross border terrorism. The issue on hand is the possibility of scores of people, mainly Muslims, being declared as stateless. The problem at hand is the massive exercise of going through the responses/documents from over 120 crore of Indian population and screening documents, which as seen in Assam, yield result which are far from truthful or necessary.

The issue of CAA has been extensively debated and despite heavy critique of the same by large number of groups and despite the biggest mass opposition ever to any move in Independent India, the Government is determined on going ahead with an exercise which is reminiscent of the dreaded regimes which are sectarian and heartless to its citizens, which have indulged in extinction of large mass of people on grounds of citizenship, race etc. The Foreign minister’s assertion is that it is a matter internal to India, where India’s sovereignty is all that matters! As far as sovereignty is concerned we should be clear that in current times any sovereign power has to consider the need to uphold the citizenship as per the principle of non-discrimination which is stipulated in Art.26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political (ICCPR) rights.

Can such policies, which affect large number of people and are likely to affect their citizenship be purely regarded as ‘internal’? With the World turning into a global village, some global norms have been formulated during last few decades. The norms relate to Human rights and migrations have been codified. India is also signatory to many such covenants in including ICCPR, which deals with the norms for dealing with refugees from other countries. One is not talking of Chicago speech of Swami Vivekanand, which said that India’s greatness has been in giving shelter to people from different parts of the World; one is also not talking of the Tattariaya Upanishad’s ‘Atithi Devovhav’ or ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam’ from Mahaupanishad today.

What are being talked about are the values and opinions of organizations which want to ensure to preserve of Human rights of all people Worldwide. In this matter India is calling United Nations body as ‘foreign party’; having no locus standi in the case as it pertains to India’s sovereignty. The truth is that since various countries are signatories to UN covenants, UN bodies have been monitoring the moves of different states and intervening at legal level as Amicus (Friend of the Court) to the courts in different countries and different global bodies. Just to mention some of these, UN and High Commissioner for Human Rights has often submitted amicus briefs in different judicial platforms. Some examples are their intervention in US Supreme Court, European Court of Human Rights, International Criminal Court, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. These are meant to help the Courts in areas where UN bodies have expertise.

 Expertise on this has been jointly formulated by various nations. These interventions also remind the nations as to what global norms have been evolved and what are the obligations of individual states to the values which have evolved over a period of time. Arvind Narrain draws our attention to the fact that, “commission has intervened in the European Court of Human Rights in cases involving Spain and Italy to underscore the principle of non-refoulement, which bars compulsory expulsion of illegal migrants… Similarly, the UN has intervened in the International Criminal Court in a case against the Central African Republic to explicate on the international jurisprudence on rape as a war crime.”

From time to time organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been monitoring the status of Human rights of different countries. This puts those countries in uncomfortable situation and is not welcome by those establishments. How should this contradiction between ‘internal matter’, ‘sovereignty’ and the norms for Human rights be resolved? This is a tough question at the time when the freedom indices and democratic ethos are sliding downwards all over the world. In India too has slid down on the scale of these norms.

In India we can look at the intervention of UN body from the angle of equality and non discrimination. Democratic spirit should encourage us to have a rethink on the matters which have been decided by the state. In the face of the greatest mass movement of Shaheen bagh, the state does need to look inwards and give a thought to international morality, the spirit of global family to state the least.

The popular perception is that when Christians were being persecuted in Kandhmal the global Christian community’s voice was not strong enough. Currently in the face of Delhi carnage many a Muslim majority countries have spoken. While Mr. Modi claims that his good relations with Muslim countries are a matter of heartburn to the parties like Congress, he needs to relook at his self gloating. Currently Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia and many Muslim majority countries have spoken against what Modi regime is unleashing in India. Bangladesh, our neighbor, has also seen various protests against the plight of Muslims in India. More than the ‘internal matter’ etc. what needs to be thought out is the moral aspect of the whole issue. We pride ourselves in treading the path of morality. What does that say in present context when while large section of local media is servile to the state, section of global media has strongly brought forward what is happening to minorities in India.   

The hope is that Indian Government wakes up to its International obligations, to the worsening of India’s image in the World due to CAA and the horrific violence witnessed in Delhi.

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 16,2020

New Delhi, Mar 16: A total of 110 cases of coronavirus, including 17 foreign nationals have been confirmed across India, Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare said on Sunday.

The maximum positive cases have been reported from Maharashtra (32), followed by Kerala (22).

The total number of passengers screened at airports is 12,76,046, the ministry said.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) has declared that Europe has become the new 'epicentre' of the coronavirus pandemic that has infected more than 15 lakh people with over 6,000 deaths globally.

The virus had first emerged in China's Wuhan city in December last year.

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
May 12,2020

Ahmedabad, May 12: The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday declared state BJP minister Bhupendrasinh Chudasama's election in 2017 as void on grounds of malpractice and manipulation.

Justice Paresh Upadhyay cancelled Bhupendrasinh Chudasama's election in an order passed on a petition filed by Congress candidate Ashwin Rathod, challenging the BJP leader's victory from Dholka constituency by a margin of 327 votes in the 2017 Gujarat Assembly polls.

In his election petition, Ashwin Rathod alleged that Bhupendrasinh Chudasama indulged in "corrupt practice and breach of many of the mandatory instructions of the Election Commission, at various stages of the election process, more particularly at the time of counting of votes".

Bhupendrasinh Chudasama currently holds charge of the education, law and justice, legislative and parliamentary affairs, and some other departments in the Vijay Rupani government.

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.