Follow Us:
Friday, September 24, 2021

Triple talaq is cruel, says Allahabad HC

Welcoming the judgement, Information and Broadcasting Minister M Venkaiah Naidu said women should get justice and everyone agrees to it.

By: PTI | New Delhi |
Updated: December 9, 2016 2:24:51 am
triple talaq, AIMPLB, muslim personal law board, AIMPLB triple talaq, uniform civil code, ucc AIMPLB, UCC muslims, india news Shaista Ambar, chairperson of All India Muslim Women Personal Law Board, who had earlier expressed reservations over a uniform civil code, today said the practice of triple talaq was “unjustified”.

OBSERVING THAT the judicial conscience is “disturbed”, the Allahabad High Court has held that triple talaq is “cruel” and asked whether the Muslim Personal law could be amended to alleviate the sufferings of Muslim women. The court has held that this form of “instant divorce” is “most demeaning”, which “impedes and drags India from becoming a nation”. “The question which disturbs the court is — should Muslim wives suffer this tyranny for all times? Should their personal law remain so cruel towards these unfortunate wives? Whether the personal law can be amended suitably to alleviate their sufferings? The judicial conscience is disturbed at this monstrosity,” a single judge bench of Justice Suneet Kumar said on November 5.

The court made the observations while dismissing a petition of one Hina (23) and her husband, who was 30 years her senior, and had married her “after effecting triple talaq to his wife”. “Muslim law, as applied in India, has taken a course contrary to the spirit of what the Prophet or the Holy Quran laid down and the same misconception vitiates the law dealing with the wife’s right to divorce,” said Kumar. He added: “The purpose of law in a modern, secular state… is to bring about social change. The Muslim community comprises a large percentage of Indian population, therefore, a large section of citizens, in particular women, cannot be left to be governed by archaic customs and social practice under the garb of personal law purportedly having divine sanction.”

“India is a nation in the making, geographical boundaries alone do not define a nation. It is to be adjudged, among others, on the parameter of overall human development and how the society treats its women; leaving such a large population to the whims and fancies of a personal law which perpetuates gender inequality and is regressive, is not in the interest of the society and the country. It impedes and drags India from becoming a nation,” the court remarked. It observed that “divorce is permissible in Islam only in case of extreme emergency”.

“When all efforts for effecting a reconciliation have failed, the parties may proceed to a dissolution of marriage by Talaq or by Khola… The view that the Muslim husband enjoys an arbitrary, unilateral power to inflict instant divorce does not accord with Islamic injunctions. It is a popular fallacy that a Muslim husband enjoys, under the Quranic Law, unbridled authority to liquidate the marriage,” the court said. “The whole Quran expressly forbids a man to seek pretexts for divorcing his wife, so long as she remains faithful and obedient to him… The Islamic law gives to the man primarily the faculty of dissolving the marriage, if the wife, by her indocility or her bad character, renders the married life unhappy; but in the absence of serious reasons, no man can justify a divorce, either in the eye of religion or the law,” it added.

Hina and her husband, hailing from Bulandshahr district, had moved court seeking a direction to the police and Hina’s mother that they stop harassing the petitioners and their safety be ensured. The court made it clear that it was not disputing the contention of the petitioner’s counsel that the couple “are adults and are at liberty to choose their own partner” and they “cannot be deprived of their right to life and personal liberty”. “Nor difference in age is an issue”, it said.

However, it added: “What is disturbing is that the instrument of instant divorce (triple talaq) has been used for ulterior purpose (by the man) for divorcing his wife… first petitioner (the woman) left her family and joined the company of the second petitioner and consequently the second petitioner decided to get rid of his first wife.” Stating that it would “not like to say anything further as the Supreme Court is seized of the matter”, the court added that “the legality of the marriage or divorce and rights of parties is kept open”. It went on to dismiss the petition.


📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App.

  • The Indian Express website has been rated GREEN for its credibility and trustworthiness by Newsguard, a global service that rates news sources for their journalistic standards.
0 Comment(s) *
* The moderation of comments is automated and not cleared manually by