Standpoint: Historical Triple Talaq Verdict

This article deals with the personal views of the writer and questions the extent to which the acceptance of the historical verdict will be made by the Muslim Personal Law Board.

“As per Quran, divorce is essentially undesirable but permissible when needed.”

‘Talaq-e-biddat’ or instant triple talaq is a form of Islamic divorce in India which allowed a man to legally divorce his wife after stating the word talaq three times. As per the rule, a man need not cite any reason whatsoever justifying his action and he could say the word in person, over telephonic calls and most recently over texts or electronic mails. The law suggested that there should be a certain amount of time gap given by the man who seeks a divorce from his wife while stating these words. First two times, were recommended to be utilised as a period of reconciliation and after the third time, the divorce was considered to be irrevocable. But for a lot many years, this practise was ignored and the husband would say the words in one sitting and divorce his wife instantly. According to the Muslim Personal Law Board, the women could also seek divorce from their husband but that as we all know, this has not been carried out as much the husband divorcing his wife has been.

Supreme Court on Tuesday delivered a historical verdict where in a multi-faith constitutional bench of five judges with 3:2 majority, delivered its judgement and declared this practise of instant divorce unconstitutional. This verdict has put a stop on a 1,400 year old practise and although it has given hope to millions of women who wanted this practise to be discouraged, it has received wide criticism from the Muslim Personal Law board which defends the practise and wants it to be functional. The Board claims that the people in the Muslim community seek less number of divorces as compared to other religions and there are various other issues that need to be discussed in the country and practises to be stopped, instead of pointing to the practises of the Muslim community.

The writer believes that any practise which violates the rights of not only an individual but also a community at large, should be stopped as soon as possible. Even though it had a legal backing of Shariat Law, it was violative of Muslim women’s fundamental rights to be found, more particularly in Article 14, 15(1) and 21 of the Constitution. We have numerous issues which are unconstitutional in nature but are practised widely and most of the times these things are not discussed in public and are carried out behind closed doors. Our judiciary has tried to accelerate the procedure of such important hearings and are trying their best to put an end to such things and provide justice to the ones seeking help. But why are people still supporting this practise of instant triple talaq? It is understood that it is not easy to put an end to such an old practise which has been carried out for centuries but a practise can be changed or amended to suit the present circumstances. Twenty Muslim-majority nations including Pakistan have put a ban on this practise and often it has been questioned as to why India can’t put an end to it. Why is it so difficult to let go of all this? The Muslim scholars argue that the Shariat Application Act does not define the laws and protects the application of Islamic laws in personal legal relationships. It also says the State cannot interfere in their matters and a religious committee would sit and look into the matter. There is a fine line from the point where the State can make laws, to a point where the authority of the Muslim Personal Board takes over the matter in their own hands. With this verdict putting an end to the practise of a Muslim man unilaterally, irrevocably and instantaneously divorcing his wife, unconstitutional for six-months, the Supreme Court has ordered the legislature to make a suitable law in place of triple talaq.

Well perhaps the only thing that one can now wait for is to see that how well would the Muslim community and the Muslim Personal Law Board accept this change.

Featured Image courtesy : www.wire.in