In SC, Center defends triple talaq law 2019, says it legalizes 'abandonment' of Muslim women

The Center told the Supreme Court that triple talaq legalizes and institutionalizes wife desertion as it defended the 2019 law criminalizing the practice in the Supreme Court and urged dismissal of petitions challenging it.

The Union of India said in an affidavit filed in court in response to a petition challenging the law that although the Supreme Court stayed the practice in 2017, it “did not act as a sufficient deterrent to reduce divorces.” quantity”. practices among community members”.

“It is submitted that Parliament wisely enacted the impugned Bill to protect the rights of married Muslim women who were divorced due to triple talaq.

“The impugned Bill contributes to the larger constitutional objective of ensuring gender justice and gender equality to married Muslim women and helps uphold their fundamental rights of non-discrimination and empowerment,” the affidavit said.

The affidavit stated that despite the Supreme Court's constitutional bench finding triple talaq “unconstitutional”, there are reports that such divorces are still taking place in different parts of the country.

“We are of the view that the abolition of 'talaq-e-biddat' by this Court has not acted as a sufficient deterrent to reduce the number of divorces resulting from this practice among certain Muslims.

“We therefore deem it necessary for the state to take action to implement this court's order and redress the grievances of victims of illegal divorce, leading to the enactment of this law,” the center said.

The coalition government noted that the Supreme Court “has consistently held that the court cannot review the wisdom of the measure but only the constitutionality of its legislation.”

“Similarly, courts are only concerned with interpreting the law and, if the law is valid, applying the law they find, rather than discussing what the law should be.

“This Court further recognizes and reiterates again and again that the Legislature alone can decide what is good and what is bad for the people of this land and they must be given the widest freedom to exercise it. Their functions must be within the scope of their powers within the scope, otherwise all progress will be hindered.

The Union government argued that when the Supreme Court itself stayed the practice of talaq-e-biddat, the court “should not interfere with the enactment of the legislation”. . In view of this, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed within limited time”.

It held that “the Shayala Bano case itself held that the practice of triple talaq was manifestly arbitrary and therefore the law criminalizing the practice cannot be said to be manifestly arbitrary.

It said: “The vital principle of the impugned law itself derives from the finding in Shayala Bano's case that triple talaq is neither Islamic nor lawful, which can be gleaned from the statement of objects and reasons of the law see.

“The allegation that marriage is governed by personal law and therefore not subject to general criminal law is unfounded,” the affidavit states.

On August 22, 2017, the Supreme Court declared instant triple talaq (talaq-e-biddah) unconstitutional. On August 23, 2019, the Supreme Court agreed to review the validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.

Violations of the law are punishable by up to three years in prison.

Two Muslim organizations – Jamiat Ulam-I-Hind and Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema – urged the court to declare the law “unconstitutional”.

Jamiat claimed in its petition that “criminalizing the practice of divorce of a particular religion while leaving the subject of marriage and divorce of other religions only within the ambit of civil law would lead to discrimination and is inconsistent with the mandate of Article 15 ”.

(This report has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from United News Agency-PTI)