E-Paper
Government has a month to reply on triple talaq
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday granted four weeks’ time to the Centre to respond to petitions challenging triple talaq and other “regressive” practices in
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday granted four weeks’ time to the Centre to respond to petitions challenging triple talaq and other “regressive” practices in Muslim law.
Centre was to file its submissions on the contentious issue by Tuesday. But additional solicitor general Tushar Mehta appeared before a bench Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justice DY Chandrachud and sought more time to spell out the government’s stand.
On September 2, All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), a non-governmental institution that oversees Muslim personal law, told the top court that personal laws of a community cannot be “rewritten” in the name of social reforms. The institution also opposed pleas on issues including alleged gender discrimination faced by Muslim women in divorce cases.
It is better to divorce a woman than kill her, the board had told the court, defending the practice of triple talaq that faces a legal challenge for bias against women.
AIMPLB also said the Muslim law gave husbands the power to divorce as they were emotionally more stable. “Shariah grants the right to divorce because men have greater power of decision-making. They are more likely to control emotions and not take a hasty decision,” the board said in an affidavit.
Triple talaq, under which a Muslim man can repeat the word talaq thrice to divorce his wife, violated women’s right to equality, several women have told the Supreme Court.
India has separate sets of personal laws for each religion governing marriage, divorce, succession, adoption and maintenance.
While Hindu law overhaul began in the 1950s and continues, activists have long argued that Muslim personal law, which has remained mostly unchanged, is tilted against women.
To end the confusion over personal laws, the court has been advocating a uniform civil code. The AIMPLB said constitutional provision on uniform civil code cannot be enforced.
