Today, On 29th January, The Supreme Court requested the Centre to provide data on the total number of FIRs registered under the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019. The court was hearing multiple petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Act, which makes the practice of Triple Talaq a criminal offense.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court heard multiple petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, which criminalizes the practice of Triple Talaq.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar, questioned the rationale for penalizing the pronouncement of Triple Talaq when divorce itself is not legally recognized.
The Court instructed the parties to submit written arguments and requested the government to provide data on the number of FIRs registered and pending cases, particularly in rural areas.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union government, defended the law, asserting that its criminalization is essential to protect Muslim women from arbitrary abandonment.
He stated,
“This is required to protect women and should act as a deterrent. Many offences carry more than three years of imprisonment.”
CJI Khanna countered the petitioners’ argument about the criminalization of merely pronouncing talaq, remarking,
“If the divorce itself is not recognized, the relationship continues, and there is no separation. But now, you have penalized the very act of pronouncing it.”
The Court also asked for information on the number of pending cases nationwide and whether similar challenges were before any High Court.
Senior Advocate M.R. Shamshad and Advocate Nizam Pasha, representing the petitioners, argued that criminalization is disproportionate and noted that abandonment in matrimonial cases is not treated as a criminal offence for other communities.
Shamshad added,
“In many matrimonial disputes, FIRs are not registered for months, but in these cases, an FIR is filed merely upon the occurrence of the pronouncement.”
In defense of the law, SG Mehta described Triple Talaq as an inhumane practice not found in other communities.
He quoted Pakistani poetess Parveen Shakir, stating,
“Talaq toh de rahe ho gurur-o-shurur ke saath, meri jawani bhi lauta do mere meher ke saath.”
The CJI ordered that the batch of petitions be listed under the challenge to the constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, scheduling further consideration for the week beginning March 17, 2025.
In August 2024, the Ministry of Law and Justice filed a counter affidavit in a writ petition challenging the constitutionality of the “Triple Talaq Act,” asserting that it violates Articles 14, 15, 21, and 123 of the Constitution.
The affidavit noted that the law was enacted after the Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench ruled in Shayara Bano Vs. Union of India and Others (2017) that the practice of “talaq-e-biddat” violates fundamental rights and women’s equality.
The affidavit stated,
“The Bill proposed to declare the practice of triple talaq as void and illegal, making it an offence punishable by up to three years of imprisonment, triable by a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class.”
It also mentioned provisions for subsistence allowance for married Muslim women and custody of minor children.
After the Supreme Court’s decision, the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017 was introduced and passed by the Lok Sabha but was pending in the Rajya Sabha. Due to the urgency of the matter, the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Ordinance, 2018 was promulgated, followed by subsequent ordinances. Ultimately, the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2019 was enacted on July 31, 2019.
The affidavit emphasized that the Court’s role is to assess the constitutionality of legislation, not its wisdom.
It argued,
“The petitioners attempt to argue that since the practice of triple talaq has no legal effect after the Shayara Bano case, it cannot be criminalized. This argument turns the principle of penal laws on their head.”
It further stated,
“If the petitioners agree that the pronouncement of talaq-e-biddat has no legal effect and is manifestly arbitrary after the Shayara Bano judgment, they should not have any grievance with the criminalization of that action.”
The affidavit concluded that the Act is a necessary legislative response to uphold the Court’s decision and should not be dismissed.
Case Title: Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema v. Union of India [Writ Petition (C) No. 994 of 2019
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
