Advertisment

SC Asks Centre for Data on Triple Talaq FIRs, Chargesheets Filed

The central question raised during the hearing was whether it is justifiable to criminalise the mere pronouncement of triple talaq when the practice is no longer legally recognised.

author-image
Pratidin Time
New Update
Supreme Court Pushes for Urgent Completion of Kaziranga Elevated Corridor

SC Asks Centre for Data on Triple Talaq FIRs, Chargesheets Filed

Seven and a half years after declaring the practice of triple talaq unconstitutional, the Supreme Court of India has resumed hearings on petitions challenging the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, also known as the triple talaq criminalisation law. The law criminalises the act of pronouncing triple talaq and provides for a three-year jail term for Muslim men who engage in the practice.

Advertisment

The bench, led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, initiated the hearing of a batch of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) questioning the validity of the Act. The petitioners, including Maulana Amir Rashadi Madani, the Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema, and the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, argue that the law is unconstitutional, asserting that it criminalises an act that has already been declared void by the Supreme Court.

The central question raised during the hearing was whether it is justifiable to criminalise the mere pronouncement of triple talaq when the practice is no longer legally recognised. Chief Justice Khanna pointed out, "If divorce through triple talaq is not recognised by law or the SC judgment, it means the relationship between husband and wife continues... You have criminalised the talaq pronouncement, but the relationship has not come to an end."

The Court sought clarification from the Centre on the number of FIRs registered against Muslim men for giving triple talaq, as well as data on chargesheets filed. It also asked whether similar petitions had been filed before any High Courts and scheduled the matter for further hearing on March 17.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing on behalf of the Centre, defended the criminalisation, asserting that the practice of triple talaq continued to persist despite the Supreme Court's 2017 verdict banning it. He framed the issue as a matter of policy, arguing, “Can someone simply say 'talaq talaq talaq' and instantly sever ties with their wife? Such a practice cannot be allowed.”

Mehta contended that a minimum sentence of three years was essential for all offences against women, further bolstering the Centre's stance on criminalisation.

The Centre, in its affidavit, had argued that the Supreme Court’s decision to set aside triple talaq had failed to serve as an effective deterrent. The criminalisation, it stated, was necessary to reduce instances of triple talaq and bring an end to the practice. "Criminalisation and punishment through a jail term are seen as sufficient deterrents in reducing the number of divorces by this practice," the Centre stated.

However, the petitioners argue that the Act is not fulfilling its intended purpose of protecting women. They contend that while the law criminalises the act of triple talaq, it does not address the need for maintenance or protection for women left vulnerable by the practice. 

"The law criminalises an act that is already void, but there are no provisions for maintenance. What happens to the woman if her husband is sent to jail?" the petitioners ask, highlighting the gap in the Act's provisions for women’s welfare.

Centre triple talaq Supreme Court Sanjiv Khanna