Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
Top Stories

"No Urgency" : Supreme Court On Plea Challenging Talaq-E-Hasan; Asks Petitioner To Mention Next Week

Shruti Kakkar
25 May 2022 6:44 AM GMT
Allahabad High Court, ‘Triple Talaq’ As ‘Khula Talaq’, Quashes Complaint
x

A petition challenging Muslim personal law practice of divorce through the Muslim personal law practice of Talaq-E-Hasan was mentioned before a vacation bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday for urgent listing.

Senior Advocate Pinky Anand mentioned the Public Interest Litigation petition filed by journalist Benazeer Heena before a vacation bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Bela Trivedi, saying that the petitioner has received the second notice of talaq.

As per Talaq-E-Hasan, a Muslim man can divorce his wife by pronouncing "talaq" once a month for three months.

"Notices have been issued through lawyer for Talaq E Hasan. We're challenging the proceedings. First notice was issued on April 19. Now second notice has been issued ", Ms.Anand submitted.

"Why under Article 32?", Justice Chandrachud asked.

"The issue of only Talaq E Biddat was considered was considered in Shayra Bano. Talaq-E-Hasan was left out. We are challenging it", Anand replied.

"There is no urgency. We will keep it on the re-opening day after vacations", Justice Chandrachud said.

"By that time everything third talaq will be given and everything will be over. She has recieved the second notice on May 19 and on June 20 it will be over"

"There is no urgency in this. You recieve the first notice on April 19 and wait for a period to come here", Justice Chandrachud said.

"By reopening everything will be over. It is about a women being abused", Anand requested.

"You mention it next week, take your chance then", Justice Chandrachud said.

Earlier, on May 9, the Chief Justice of India had refused to grant urgent listing for the plea.

The petitioner argues that the practice is discriminatory since only men can exercise the same and seeks a declaration that the practice is unconstitutional as it is arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 25 of the constitution. According to the petitioner, it is not an essential practice of Islamic faith.



Next Story