TRIPLE
TALAQ EXPLAINED!
Women have been depicted as obedient beings based solely on the verses above. They've been portrayed as powerless; men have complete control over them.
According to God's word, men and women are equal, as mentioned in the Quran (74:38). Which says "Every soul will be (held) in pledge for its deeds." However, there are significant flaws in consistently reading Quran verses.
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgement on the
constitutional validity of
"Talaq-e-Biddat," also known as "Triple Talaq," one of three male-initiated divorces in the Muslim community. The other two are "Talaq ahasan" and "Talaq hasan.”. This contentious tradition, which intersects gender identity and culture, has left Muslim women vulnerable to violence and in a morbid state, particularly given the socioeconomic aspect, where the majority of women are financially dependent on their husband, and the added fear of this arbitrary divorce leaves many cases of marital abuse unreported.
Rizwan Ahmed was Shayara Bano's husband for 15 years. He divorced her in 2016 by sending her a letter, a divorce letter in which the word talaq was written thrice is it (talaq-e-biddat). This is an Islamic custom that allows men to unilaterally and arbitrarily effect an immediate and irreversible divorce by pronouncing the word talaq (Arabic for divorce) three times in an oral, written, or, more recently, electronic format She petitioned the Supreme Court for a declaration that, immediate triple talaq (talaq -e biddat), polygamy, and Nikah Halala were unlawful, unconstitutional, and in violation of Articles 14 (equality before the law) ,15 (non-discrimination) ,21 (right to life with dignity) and 25 (right to freedom of conscience and religion) of the Indian Constitution. The Court, on the other hand, decided to focus solely on the topic of immediate triple talaq (talaq -e biddat).
Where Nikah Halala is a practise in which a divorced woman must marry and seek a divorce before remarrying her husband and from a second husband before she can go back to her first husband. And polygamy is a practice which allows Muslim men to have more than one wife
It is Talak-ul-Biddat that is the subject of debate. This is known as Triple Talaq, and it was challenged in this case before the Supreme Court. In Shias, however, Talak-ul-biddat is forbidden. However, the Hanafi School considers it to be immoral, despite the fact that it is followed by a large Muslim population. The Husband does not follow the permitted form of Talaq, talaq-ul-sunnat, and he does not wait for the iddat time or the abstention from sexual intercourse in this type of Talaq. The Islamic patriarchal society devised this escape route to stop their marriage.
In this form of divorce, the husband divorces his wife three times in a single sentence. The main issue with this form of talaq is that, unlike its equivalents, it is irreversible.
On February 16, 2017, the Court requested written submissions from Shayara Bano, the Union of India, various women's rights organisations, and the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on the issues of talaq-e-bidat, nikah-halala, and polygamy. Ms Bano's argument that these activities are unconstitutional was backed by the Union of India and women's rights organisations such as Bebaak Collective and Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan (BMMA). The AIMPLB has argued that uncodified Muslim personal law is not subject to judicial review under the Constitution, and that these are fundamental Islamic practises covered under Article 25 of the Constitution.
The Court in this case was primarily concerned with the procedure of triple talaq. The practise of triple talaq was declared illegal by the Supreme Court in August 2017 by a 3:2 vote. Justice Nariman wrote the majority opinion for himself and on behalf of Justice Lalit, while Justice Joseph agreed with the majority opinion. Chief Justice Kehar wrote the minority opinion for himself and on behalf of Justice Nazeer. Although the majority of the bench determined that Triple Talaq is not an important religious practise after much debate, the minority bench determined that it is. The state cannot take away a person's fundamental religious practise under Article 25 of the Constitution. As a result, if a practise is arbitrary and not an essential religious practise, it will fall under the u/a 25 exemption. As a result, the entire debate revolved around whether or not the practise is an important Islamic religious practise
As a result, according to the majority, the Triple Talaqor Talaq-e-biddat is not covered by Article 25's exemption, i.e., the court determined that the practise is not an integral element of Islamic religion.
While it is practised by the Hanafi School, the court justified its position by stating that it is considered immoral in it. Triple Talaq is incompatible with the fundamental tenets of the Quran, and everything that is incompatible with the Quran is incompatible with Shariat. As a result, what is bad in theology cannot be good in law.
According to the general opinion, triple talaq is illegal under Article 14 and Article 13 of the Constitution (1). The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, had sanctioned the practise as a matter of personal law, according to the Court. The Court explained that “arbitrary action would necessarily entail negation of equality” and determined that, since triple talaq stipulates that “the marital tie can be broken capriciously without any effort at reconciliation in order to preserve it,” this arbitrariness violates Article 14. The Court determined that the 1937 Act is unconstitutional to the degree that it accepts and enforces triple talaq, citing Article 13(1) of the Constitution, which states that all laws in effect immediately before the commencement of the current Constitution (including the 1937 Act) are void to the extent that they are inconsistent with the Constitution's fundamental rights. The Court also considered whether triple talaq is covered under Article 25, but determined that it is not necessary for the practise of Islam after reviewing relevant precedents and Islamic scholarship.
As a result of this ruling, triple talaq is no longer legal in India. Following the ruling, the government introduced a bill criminalising triple talaq on its own initiative.
The Lok Sabha passed this bill in December 2017, and it is currently before the Rajya Sabha, where a united opposition has requested that it be sent to a parliamentary committee for review.
The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Friday, and it will be debated and voted on. This bill allows instant triple talaq, also known as talaq-e-biddat, a criminal offence. It makes the pronouncement of talaq-e-biddat "void and illegal."
A man who utters the word talaq on his wife will be sentenced to prison and fined. The proclamation of talaq-e-biddat is also made a non-bailable offence under this bill.
"Whoever pronounces talaq referred to in section 3 upon his wife shall be punished with imprisonment for a period which may extend to three years and fine," says Clause 4 of the Bill.
"An offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable and non-bailable within the scope of the Code," the seventh clause states. In 1973, the Code of Criminal Procedure was enacted.
The woman who is subjected to talaq must receive an allowance from her husband, and she maintains custody of her children.
"A married Muslim woman upon whom talaq is pronounced shall be entitled to receive from her husband certain amount of subsistence allowance for herself and dependent children," according to Clauses 5 and 6 of the Bill, and "shall be entitled to custody of her minor children in the event of talaq by her husband."
"This legislation will aid in ensuring the
greater Constitutional objectives of gender justice and gender equality of
married Muslim women and help subserve their fundamental rights of
non-discrimination and empowerment," says Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad
in the declaration of objects and reasons attached to the Bill.
Comments
Post a Comment