Triple talaq: SC seeks Centre’s response within four weeks

Defending the validity of triple talaq before the Supreme Court, the AIMPLB had earlier said that a man could murder or burn his wife alive to get rid of her if the practice is discontinued.

By: ANI | New Delhi | Updated: October 13, 2016 5:43 pm
talaq, triple talaq, divorce, muslim divorce, Supreme Court, triple talaq Supreme Court, triple talaq decision, indian muslims, issue of triple talaq, muslim marriage, nikah, three talaq, sunni, sunni jurisprudential, sunni history, islamic scholars, quran, quran teaching, islam, triple talaq SC, india news Zakia Somen, the co-founder of the Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan (BMMA) and one of the petitioners seeking a ban on triple talaq, has said the process of divorcing women practiced in India should be abolished as it is “un-Quranic”.

The Supreme Court on Monday granted four weeks’ time to the Centre to respond on a batch of petitions on triple talaq. Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta mentioned the matter before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India TS Thakur and sought more time to file the response.

WATCH VIDEO: Muslim Law Board Rejects Law Panel Questionnaire: Find Out Why

 

Zakia Somen, the co-founder of the Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan (BMMA) and one of the petitioners seeking a ban on triple talaq, has said the process of divorcing women practiced in India should be abolished as it is “un-Quranic”.

Her reaction came after the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) filed an affidavit in the apex court, stating that “personal laws cannot be re-written in the name of social reforms”.

Defending the validity of triple talaq before the Supreme Court, the AIMPLB had earlier said that a man could murder or burn his wife alive to get rid of her if the practice is discontinued.

The board also said that divorce proceedings instead of triple talaq could damage a woman’s chances of re-marriage if the husband indicts her of loose character in the court.

The AIMPLB also asked the Supreme Court to keep its hands off the issue, saying that principles of marriage, talaq and polygamy are interwoven with religious and cultural rights of Muslims, which cannot be touched upon by any court on the ground of violation of fundamental rights.

The AIMPLB further said that polygamy as a social practice is not for gratifying men’s lust, but it is a social need.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. A
    Amar Akbar
    Sep 5, 2016 at 9:12 am
    Will you be ok if I p a blasphemy law just like you did in stan but to protect Hinduism from Islam. I can say none of your business. Fair enough?
    (0)(0)
    Reply
    1. B
      big b
      Sep 5, 2016 at 8:58 am
      "AIMPLB had earlier said that a man could murder or burn his wife alive to get rid of her if the practice is discontinued" - ha ha ha ha ha halt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;Its as good as saying " I am not interested in work, but f you don't feed me free, I will steal"...lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;What a bunch of morons..I request my eductaed muslim friends to come out stringer against it and save your women from clutches of these useless organisations..
      (0)(0)
      Reply
      1. B
        big b
        Sep 5, 2016 at 9:00 am
        Yes, its a practice in my country and as an atheist, I want uniform civil code and if it needs to throw chaps like you out, we will.
        (0)(0)
        Reply
        1. I
          Indian
          Sep 5, 2016 at 8:04 am
          Quran we know today was written after the dismise of the prophet he never commissioned it to be written in his life time as we know it today, all the teachings written by his followers in his life time was either burned or destro by the powerful men at the time.
          (0)(0)
          Reply
          1. R
            Ramakrishnan
            Sep 5, 2016 at 7:52 am
            If Muslims can accept common law in criminal law and civil laws other laws other than family laws, there is no reason why they cannot accept common law in family matters. Tripple talaq and polygamy are un consutional and need to be declared as such.
            (0)(0)
            Reply
            1. Load More Comments