Triple talaq prevents men from

killing wives: Muslim Law

Board to Supreme Court
AIMPLB also said that divorce proceedings instead of triple talaq could
damage a womans chances of re-marriage if the husband indicts her of loose
character in court.
Written by Utkarsh Anand | New Delhi | Updated: September 3, 2016 8:06 am

The AIMPLB asked the Supreme Court to keep its hands off the issue, saying that principles of
marriage, triple talaq and polygamy are interwoven with religious and cultural rights of Muslims.

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board, defending the validity of triple talaq before the
Supreme Court, has said that if the practice is discontinued, a man could murder or burn his wife
alive to get rid of her.

If there develops serious discord between the couple, and the husband does not at all want to
live with her, legal compulsions of time-consuming separation proceedings and expenses may
deter him from taking the legal course. In such instances, he may resort to illegal, criminal ways
of murdering or burning her alive, stated the AIMPLBs affidavit, submitted in court Friday.
The board also said that divorce proceedings instead of triple talaq could damage a womans
chances of re-marriage if the husband indicts her of loose character in court.
Granting a husband the right to divorce indirectly provides security to the wife. Marriage is a
contract in which both parties are not physically equal. Male is stronger and female weaker sex.
Man is not dependent on woman for his protection. On the contrary, she needs him for her
defence, stated the affidavit, adding that triple talaq wards off the possibility of a rise in murders
of women whose husbands want to divorce them.
The AIMPLB asked the Supreme Court to keep its hands off the issue, saying that principles of
marriage, talaq and polygamy are interwoven with religious and cultural rights of Muslims,
which cannot be touched upon by any court on the ground of violation of fundamental rights.
Personal laws of a community cannot be rewritten in the name of social reform, said the
affidavit, settled by senior advocates Yusuf Hatim Muchhala and Huzefa A Ahmadi. It also
asserted that Article 44, which envisaged a Uniform Civil Code, was only a Directive Principle
of State Policy, but was not enforceable.
Advocating polygamy, the AIMPLB said that polygamy was a social need and a blessing for
women because an unlawful mistress is more harmful for social fabric than a lawful second
wife. The affidavit argued that the death rate of men was higher since it was mostly men who
died in accidents, and since women outnumbered men, not permitting polygamy would force
women into leading a spinsters life.
Polygamy ensures sexual purity and chastity and whenever polygamy has been banned, it
emerges from history that illicit sex has raised its head, stated the affidavit. It added that if
polygamy is not allowed, a man would divorce an ailing wife, or he might have an extra-marital
relationship.
In all above instances, polygamy is a blessing, not a curse for women polygamy is the
solution to the problem of divorced women and widows. Women should appreciate this point that
if the ratio of women is higher, would they prefer wedlock for fellow women, or let them be

illicit mistresses of men, without any of the rights which a wife gets, said the AIMPLB, citing
some surveys to claim that Muslims have the lowest rate of polygamy in India.
It also blamed communal organisations for running a propaganda regarding prevalence of
polygamy among Muslims to instil fear in the majority community.
The affidavit called it rather strange that a law that recognises live-in relationships without
marriage worthy of protection should frown upon a relationship which is formalised by the
sanctity of marriage.
The board claimed that Muslim Personal Law, based on the Quran, adequately provided for the
rights of Muslim women and formed part of the issue of freedom of conscience and free
profession, practice and propagation of religion guaranteed under Article 25 and 26 read with
Article 29 of the Constitution of India.
It stated that although pronouncement of triple talaq in one go was undesirable and irregular,
various Islamic jurists and religious scholars have unanimously agreed that the effect of triple
talaq in one go was that it effectively terminated the marriage. Also, even if divorce was
pronounced irregularly without any valid reason, the affidavit said, it would still result in
termination of marriage.
The AIMPLB sought dismissal of a PIL by a Muslim woman, who has challenged the validity of
instantaneous and unilateral pronouncement of triple talaq, apart from a ban on polygamy. It is
on her petition that the board was asked by a bench, led by Chief Justice T S Thakur, to submit
its response.

Can't Rewrite Personal Laws in Name

of Reform, Muslim Board Tells Court

HIGHLIGHTS
1.

Supreme Court cannot interfere in religious freedom: Muslim Law Board

2.

Husband should decide on divorce as they won't take hasty decision: Board

3.

Triple Talaq has been challenged by some Muslim women

In a document justifying "triple talaq" divorce, the top decision-making body of

Muslims in India today said the Supreme Court cannot interfere in religious freedom
and "rewrite personal laws in the name of social reform".
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board told the court that the "validity of triple
Talaq cannot be decided by the Supreme Court".

The triple Talaq form of divorce is "permissible in Islam as the husband is in a better
position to take a decision because they won't take hasty decision and it is used
only when there is a valid ground," the board said.
Scriptures, it said, don't fall within the expression of "laws that can be challenged."

Stating that issues of marriage, divorce and maintenance differ from religion to
religion, the board said, "The validity of the rights in one religion can't be
questioned by court. As per Quran divorce is essentially undesirable but permissible
when needed."
The policy of Islam, the affidavit says, is that "it is better to dissolve the marriage
when there is bitterness among couples."
The law board said it's a "misconception that a Muslim man enjoys unilateral power
in divorce." Also, while Islam permits polygamy, it doesn't encourage it, said the
group.
A Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice TS Thakur is hearing a batch of
petitions on the conflict between fundamental guarantees in the constitution and
personal laws in the country.
Triple Talaq has been challenged by some Muslim women. Among them is Ishrat
Jahan, whose husband divorced her on the phone. Ms Jahan has argued that divorce
through spoken words violates fundamental rights.
Ms Jahan alleges that she was denied the custody of her four children aged between
7 and 12 years and also deprived of property rights over her husband's home.
In July, based on these demands for the abolition of the triple talaq, the Supreme
Court called for a wider debate.

Govt to oppose triple talaq

in SC citing womens rights

The Law Ministry will file a consolidated reply on the issue in

the apex court by the end of this month.
FacebookTwitterGoogle+Email

Every court decision has slowly been taking us to these uniform rights. The practice of
triple talaq doesnt exist even in Pakistan or Bangladesh. Only we have it, the senior
functionary said.

The Centre will be opposing in the Supreme Court the triple talaq practice on the grounds of
womens rights, terming it as inalienable and asserting that the issue should not be seen from
the prism of uniform civil code, a highly placed government functionary said today.
The Law Ministry will file a consolidated reply on the issue in the apex court by the end of this
month. The issue is being deliberated upon at inter-ministerial level which includes ministries of
Home, Finance and Women and Child Development apart from the Law ministry.

We shouldnt approach it from (the prism of) uniform civil code. We need to talk in terms of
rights of women. Our reply is going to be only on rights. A womans rights are inalienable and
according to the Constitution she has to have the same rights as men.
Every court decision has slowly been taking us to these uniform rights. The practice of triple
talaq doesnt exist even in Pakistan or Bangladesh. Only we have it, the senior functionary said.
Home Minister Rajnath Singh, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, Defence Minister Manohar
Parrikar and Women and Child Development Minister Maneka Gandhimet last week to
deliberate on governments possible stand to be taken in the Supreme Court on the issue of
Muslim practices of polygamy, triple talaq (talaq-e-bidat) and nikah halala (a practice where
divorced women, in case they want to go back to their husbands, have to consummate a second
marriage).
According to this source, there was a consensus among all the senior ministers present to look at
the contentious issue through the prism of gender rights.
Early this month the Supreme Court gave the Centre four weeks to submit its reply to a batch of
petitions on triple talaq.
The first among these pleas was filed by Shayara Bano from Uttarakhand who challenged the
practices like triple talaq, polygamy and nikah halala as being unconstitutional.
Two women divorced through triple talaq from Jaipur and Kolkata also approached the court.
Their petitions and a number of supportive pleas filed by Muslim womens organisations have all
been bunched together.

AIMPLB had told the apex court earlier this month that personal laws cant
be re-written in the name of reforms and
that the validity of Muslim personal law cannot be tested as it derives
from Quran.

Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, which is also one of the petitioners in SC, spearheaded a
signature campaign earlier this year in which over 50,000 Muslim women and men participated
and sought a ban on triple talaq.