The Supreme Court of India recently asked the Centre to provide data on criminal cases related to the 2019 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, which makes the practice of pronouncing triple talaq by Muslim men a criminal offence. This directive came during a hearing led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, where petitions challenging the constitutionality of the law were discussed. These petitions argued that since triple talaq has no legal effect after the 2017 Shayara Bano verdict, it should not be criminalised. Here’s a breakdown of the key developments.
Understanding the Triple Talaq Law and Its Controversy
The practice of talaq-e-biddat (triple talaq), where a Muslim man could divorce his wife by uttering "talaq" three times, was legally recognised until the Supreme Court’s 2017 ruling in the Shayara Bano case. The Court ruled that this practice violated a woman's fundamental rights, declaring it unconstitutional. Despite this ruling, triple talaq continued in certain Muslim communities, prompting the Indian government to introduce the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act in 2019. This law criminalises the practice and makes it punishable with imprisonment.
Petitioners’ Argument - Triple Talaq Should Not Be Criminalised
During the Supreme Court hearing, petitioners representing various Muslim organisations argued that triple talaq should not be criminalised. They highlighted that the practice had already been banned by the Court in 2017, making the law redundant. The petitioners also contended that no divorce could legally occur through the utterance of "talaq" three times after the Shayara Bano judgment, so criminalising it seemed unnecessary.
However, the petitioners’ claims were met with resistance. The Bench, headed by Chief Justice Khanna, noted the continued instances of triple talaq being practiced and asked the government to submit data on the number of FIRs (First Information Reports) and charge sheets filed against Muslim men for pronouncing triple talaq.
The Government’s Defense
The government, through an affidavit filed before the Court, defended the constitutionality of the 2019 law. It argued that although the Supreme Court had struck down triple talaq, its abolition had not resulted in a significant reduction in the practice. The Centre noted that victims of triple talaq had no legal recourse before the 2019 law was enacted, as there were no provisions to hold husbands accountable.
The Centre further emphasised that the law was necessary to deter Muslim men from divorcing their wives via the instantaneous practice of triple talaq. The affidavit stressed that this practice not only harmed individual women but also undermined the sanctity of marriage, constituting a public wrong that violated gender equality.
Legal Framework - The Role of the Parliament and State
In its defence, the government argued that the Parliament had enacted the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act to safeguard the rights of married Muslim women. By criminalising triple talaq, the law aimed to promote gender justice and ensure that women were not subjected to arbitrary divorce practices. The Centre also stated that the Supreme Court should not question the wisdom of the law, as it was within the legislature's authority to determine what was in the best interest of society.
Additionally, the Centre referenced the 2018 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Ordinance, which mirrored the 2019 Act. The Delhi High Court had dismissed a similar petition challenging the ordinance, further asserting that the criminalisation of triple talaq was not arbitrary.
Supreme Court’s Final Decision
The Supreme Court has scheduled the case for final hearings in the week commencing March 17. The Court will likely take into account the Centre’s data and further arguments from both sides before making its final ruling on the matter. While the Centre advocates for the law to remain intact, the petitioners continue to challenge its validity, arguing that it is unnecessary and unjust.