)

1|Page
 INTRODUCTION

Triple Talaq also known as talaq- e – biddat is a classification of divorce which is currently the
burning topic in the Indian democracy. Divorce in itself is considered as a stigma in the current
demography of society, The census of 2011 clearly shows that majority of the sufferer of this act
is women, so while seeing the bigger picture one can clearly get this view that women getting
divorce on the grounds of dowry, over expectation from the groom’s relatives and cruelty in
return tend to be the major reason of divorce, and the women of Muslim community are the
majorly handicapped victims of this atrocity.

2|Page
 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
This study focuses on the problem of “triple talaq”, which is an issue that has quite recently been
in heated debates. During past several months, there has been a high amount of controversy on
the subject of whether the practice of “triple talaq”, also known as “talaq-e-biddat” should be
declared unconstitutional, or should it be protected under the veil of Muslim personal laws.

The problems which have been witnessed in the society due to “Triple Talaq” are the main focus
of this proposed study. These include various kinds of problems, such as societal, psychological,
financial hindrances, etc.

3|Page
 OBJECTIVE OF RESEARCH
This study mainly focuses on the practice of triple talaq that has been used to the women’s
disadvantage since several decades in India. This study first explains the kinds of divorces
practiced under muslim personal law.

Thereafter, this study emphasizes on determining the constitutional validity of the practice, first
by studying the history of Islam, and then citing some cases where the human rights have been
valued more than unfair personal laws.

Further on, this study also studies the current scenario in the India related to this practice, both in
a sociological sense as well as in a legal sense.

4|Page
 HYPOTHESIS

The hypothesis claimed by this research work is that the practice of triple talaq is unfair,
atrocious and constitutionally invalid, and that such a practice should not be protected under the
ambit of personal law, but should be banished as a practice that is against the constitution of
India.

5|Page
 RESEARCH METHADOLOGY

The methodology used in this research work is partly empirical and partly doctrinal. This can
be said as this research uses data from primary and secondary sources. Primary sources are
acts, legislation by law, ordinances made by legislature itself and secondary sources are the
various judgments pronounced by the courts and various principles laid down by the courts
and other sources such as media, websites and also legal provision are quoted and discussed
in this research.

6|Page
ABBREVIATIONS USED

AIMPB All India Muslim Personal Board

AIR All India Report

CrLJ Criminal law journal

SCC Supreme Court Cases

WP Writ Petition

PIL Public Interest Litigation

NJAC National Judicial Appointments Commission

PWDVA Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act

BJD Biju Janta Dal

AIADMK All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam

NDA National Democratic Alliance

AIMIM All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen

BJP Bharatiya Janata Party

AIDWA All India Democratic Women’s Association

OBC Other Backward Classes

MP Member of Parliament

BMMA Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan

IMSD Indian Muslims for Secular Democracy

7|Page
TABLE OF CASES

1 Shayara Bano Vs. Union of India WP 118 of 2016

2 Ishrat Jahan and ors. Vs. Union of India WP 106 of 2015

3 Akbar Ali vs. Firoz Khatoon 1977 CRLJ 1654

4 Zohra Begam Vs Mohommad Ghosh AIR 1966

5 Mohommad Aseen vs Bibi Rasoolan 1972

7 Mumtaz Ali vs. Kari Munnesa

8 Mohommad Yakoon vs State of UP 1992

8|Page
SURVEY OF LITERATURE
1- Revisiting Constitutional Status of Triple Talaq
By Saptarshi Mandal, Assistant Professor, Jindal Global Law School
Do Personal Laws Get their Authority from Religion or the State

2- Triple talaq and the Constitution

By Gautam Bhatia, Advocate, Supreme Court of India
Comparison of personal laws and constitutional laws

3- A Critical Appraisal of ‘Triple Divorce’ in Islamic Law

By Dr. Nehaluddin Ahmad
Critical appraisal of the ‘innovative triple divorce’ by examining whether it is
sanctioned by the Holy Quran or the sunnah and if there is a consensus of opinion
(ijma) on the effectiveness of triple divorce.

4- Triple talaq: unconstitutional and arbitrary

BY- Ms.Nancy Jain & Ms.Janu Rani MODY UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE
ANDTECHNOLOGY
How Triple Talaq is an atrocious activity supported by legal provisions.

5- The Triple Talaq Tyranny

By Sanjana Rao, Suryakiran G & Tejas C Shetty
Triple talaq is un-Islamic and invalidated in many Muslim-majority nations and it
blatantly violates provisions of Constitution of India

9|Page
TABLE OF STATUTES

1- The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939

2- Domestic Proceedings and Magistrates’ Courts Act, 1978.
3- Magistrates’ Courts Act, 1980.
4- The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.
5- The Indian Divorce Act, 1872.
6- The Matrimonial Causes Act, 1973.
7- The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986
8- The Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936.
9- The Special Marriage Act, 1954.

10 | P a g e
CHAPTER-I INTRODUCTION

1 What is Triple Talaq

2 Divorce under Islamic Law

2.1 ‘Talaq-e-ahsan’,
2.2 ‘talaq-e-biddat’
2.3 The Holy Quran – with reference to ‘talaq’:
2.4 HISTORY OF TRIPLE TALAQ IN INDIA

CHAPTER- II CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF TRIPLE TALAQ

1. Judicial considerations

2. Gender Parity

CHAPTER- III CURRENT SCENARIO

1. How Triple talaq became a mainstream concern

2. Ruling of the Supreme Court
2.1 Status before the judgment
2.2 Is the custom of ‘Nikah Halala’ still
prevalent?
2.3 Has the practice discontinued?
2.4 What about the validity of ‘other’ form of
talaq such as talaq-e-Sunnat, khula, etc?
2.5 What about the other barbarous practices
such as ‘nikah Halala’?

11 | P a g e
 2.6 Does DAR-UL-QAZA stand with this
verdict?
2.7 Is the bill comprehensive?
3. Triple Talaq in other Nations

CHAPTER IV- LEGISLATIVE STATUS OF TRIPLE TALAQ

1. Triple Talaq Bill

1.1 What does the Bill say?

1.2 What is the proposed punitive measure?

1.3 How does this protect Muslim women's rights?

2. Criticism faced by the Bill

2.1 An unjust recommendation

2.2 Personal liberty

3. Why the bill didn’t make it through Rajya Sabha

4. Questions Raised against the Bill

12 | P a g e
 5. Recent Happenings related to the Bill

CHAPTER-V Conclusion

13 | P a g e
1|Page
CHAPTER-I INTRODUCTION

1. What is Triple Talaq

Triple Talaq also known as talaq- e – biddat, instant divorce and talaq-e-mughallazah (irrevocable
divorce),[2] is a form of Islamic divorce which has been used by Muslims in India, especially
adherents of Hanafi Sunni Islamic schools of jurisprudence. It allows any Muslim man to legally
divorce his wife by stating the word talaq (the Arabic word for "divorce") three times in oral,
written, or more recently, electronic form is a classification of divorce which is currently the
burning topic in the Indian democracy. Divorce in itself is considered as a stigma in the current
demography of society, The census of 2011 clearly shows that majority of the sufferer of this act
is women, so while seeing the bigger picture one can clearly get this view that women getting
divorce on the grounds of dowry, over expectation from the groom’s relatives and cruelty in return
tend to be the major reason of divorce, and the women of Muslim community are the major
handicap of this atrocity.1

1
Consensus of 2011 on Divorce

2|Page
2- Divorce under Islamic Law

The Islamic law, divorce is classified into three categories. Talaq understood Simply, is a means
of divorce, at the instance of the husband. ‘Khula’, is another mode of divorce, this divorce is at
the instance of the wife. The third category of divorce is ‘mubaraat’ divorce by mutual consent.
‘Talaq’, or divorce which is at the instance of the husband, is of three kinds, namely ‘talaq-e-
ahsan’, ‘talaq-e-hasan’ and ‘talaq-e-biddat’.2The ‘talaq-e-ahsan’ and ‘talaq-e- hasan’ are both
approved by the ‘Quran’ and ‘hadith’.

2.1-‘Talaq-e-ahsan’,It is considered as the ‘most reasonable’ form of divorce, whereas, ‘talaq-

e-hasan’ is also considered as ‘reasonable’. ‘Talaq-e-ahsan’ is a single pronouncement of ‘talaq’
by the husband,followed by a period of abstinence. The period of abstinence is described as ‘iddat’.
The duration of the ‘iddat’ is ninety days or three menstrual cycles(in case, where the wife is
menstruating). Alternatively, the period of ‘iddat’is of three lunar months (in case, the wife is not
menstruating). If thecouple resumes the cohabitation, or intimacy, within the iddat period,
thedivorce pronouncement is treated as revoked. Thus,‘talaq-e-ahsan’ can be revoked. Conversely,
where the cohabitation or intimacyis not resumed during the period of ‘iddat’, the divorce becomes
irrevocable and final after the ‘iddat’ period’s expiry. It is considered irrevocable because, the
couple is forbidden to resume marital relationship thereafter, unless they contract a fresh ‘nikah’
(-marriage), with a fresh ‘mahr’. ‘Mahr’ is a payment that is mandatory, which may be in the form
of possessions or money, that is paid or promised to be paid, either by the groom or by the groom’s
father, to the bride, at the time of marriage, which legally becomes herproperty. However, on the
third pronouncement of such a ‘talaq’, thecouple cannot remarry, unless the wife first marries
someone else, and onlyafter her marriage with other person has been dissolved (either
through‘talaq’ - divorce, or death), can the couple remarry. Amongst Muslims,‘talaq-e-ahsan’ is
regarded as – ‘the most proper’ form of divorce.3 ‘Talaq-e-hasan’ is pronounced in the same
manner, as ‘talaq-e-ahsan’.Herein, in place of a single pronouncement, there are threesuccessive
pronouncements. After the first pronouncement of divorce, ifthere is resumption of cohabitation
within a period of one month, thepronouncement of divorce is treated as having been revoked. The
sameprocedure is mandated to be followed, after the expiry of the first month(during which marital

2
Muslim Personal Law by Avtar Singh Pg no. 332; The Times of India, Editorial 22nd August, 2017
3
Holy Quran

3|Page
ties have not been resumed). ‘Talaq’ is pronouncedagain. After the second pronouncement of
‘talaq’, if there is resumption ofcohabitation within a period of one month, the pronouncement of
divorce istreated as having been revoked. It is significant to note, that the first andthe second
pronouncements may be revoked by the husband. If he does so,either expressly or by resuming
conjugal relations, ‘talaq’ pronounced bythe husband becomes ineffective, as if no ‘talaq’ had ever
been expressed. Ifthe third ‘talaq’ is pronounced, it becomes irrevocable. 4 Therefore, if
norevocation is made after the first and the second declaration, and thehusband makes the third
pronouncement, in the third ‘tuhr’ (period ofpurity), as soon as the third declaration is made, the
‘talaq’ becomesirrevocable, and the marriage stands dissolved, whereafter, the wife has toobserve
the required ‘iddat’ (the period after divorce, during which a womancannot remarry. Its purpose is
to ensure, that the male parent of anyoffspring is clearly identified). And after the third ‘iddat’, the
husband andwife cannot remarry, unless the wife first marries someone else, and onlyafter her
marriage with another person has been dissolved (either throughdivorce or death), can the couple
remarry. The distinction between ‘talaq-eashan’and ‘talaq-e-hasan’ is, that in the former there is a
singlepronouncement of ‘talaq’ followed by abstinence during the period of ‘iddat’,whereas, in the
latter there are three pronouncements of ‘talaq’,interspersed with abstinence. As against ‘talaq-e-
ahsan’, which is regardedas ‘the most proper’ form of divorce, Muslims regard ‘talaq-e-hasan’
only as‘the proper form of divorce’.2.2- ‘talaq-e-biddat’.This is effected by one definitive
pronouncement of ‘talaq’ such as, “I talaq you irrevocably” or three simultaneous
pronouncements, like “talaq, talaq, talaq”, uttered atthe same time, simultaneously. In ‘talaq-e-
biddat’, divorce is effectiveforthwith. The instant talaq, unlike the other two categories of ‘talaq’
isirrevocable at the very moment it is pronounced. Even amongst Muslims‘talaq-e-biddat’, is
considered irregular, there is no mention of ‘talaq-e-biddat’ inthe Quran. It was however
acknowledged, that the practice of ‘talaq-ebiddat’can be traced to the second century, after the
advent of Islam. Itwas submitted, that ‘talaq-e-biddat’ has been recognized only by some
Sunnischools, most prominently, by the Hanafi sect of Sunni Muslims. It washowever emphasized,
that even those schools that recognized ‘talaq-ebiddat’described it, “as a sinful form of divorce”.5

4
AIMPB
5
AIMPB

4|Page
It is acknowledged, that this form of divorce, has been described as “bad in theology, but good in
law”. \

2.3-The Holy Quran – with reference to ‘talaq’: Muslims believe that the Quran was
revealed by God to the ProphetMuhammad over a period of about 23 years, beginning from
22.12.609,when Muhammad was 40 years old. The revelation continued upto the year632 – the
year of his death. Shortly after Muhammad’s death, the Quranwas completed by his companions,
who had either written it down, or hadmemorized parts of it. These compilations had differences
of perception.Therefore, Caliph Usman - the third, in the line of caliphs recorded astandard version
of the Quran, now known as Usman’s codex. This codex isgenerally treated as the original
rendering of the Quran.The text and translation in this book is the most reliable, and could safely
be reliedupon. 6The Quran is divided into ‘suras’ (chapters) Each ‘sura’ contains‘verses’, which
are arranged in sections. Since our determination is limitedto the validity of ‘talaq-e-biddat’, within
the framework of the Muslim‘personal law’ – ‘Shariat’, we shall only make a reference to such
‘verses’from the Quran, as would be relevant for our above determination. In thisbehalf, reference
may first be made to ‘verses’ 222 and 223 contained in the chapter clearly depicts that’s there is
no say of talaq a biddat as a validdivorce and it is considered immoral and sinful.7talaq-i-
Bid'ah means innovated (or sinful) form of Divorce. It is defined as a divorce which is pronounced
thrice in one sitting when the wife is in the state of purity (tuhr), i.e., when man says: "I divorce
you, I divorce you, I divorce you." The Hanafis believe that though this form of divorce is sinful
and innovative, it is nevertheless valid and divorce will take place. According to the Hanafis when
triple divorce is pronounced, the wife will become totally alienated from the husband and he cannot
remarry her. She becomes haram (totally prohibited) for him. Neither can he take her back nor
can he go for fresh nikah with her. He can go for nikah with her only after she marries another
person and that person divorces her on account of marital conflict or she becomes a
widow.According to Maulana 'Umar Ahmad 'Usmani this is the position of not only Abu Hanifa
but also of Imam Malik and Shafi'i. Imam Shafi'i says this form of divorce is perfectly valid. It is
not innovation (bid'ah). It is quite proper on the part of the husband to pronounce such a
divorce. No husband can be prevented from adopting a valid course. Even Imam Ahmad Hanbal's

6
Muslim Hanafi Board
7
Usman’s Codex; lawyerfrnd.com/199/2-/

5|Page
position is the same as that of Imam Hanifa and Imam Malik. Thus it 'seems that all major founders
of four schools of jurisprudence accept the validity of triple divorce.'But Imam Taymiyyah has
proved that Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal had retracted from his earlier position of accepting the
validity of triple divorce and in a later period he used to say that when I reflected on
the Qur'anic position I came to the conclusion that it permits only raj'i Talaq, i.e., divorce in
which the wife can be taken back. He then took the position that even if someone pronounces
triple divorce it should be treated as one only. The husband thus will have the right to take his wife
back within the 'iddah period or go for nikah if the 'iddah period has expired. Imam Ahmad's
companions and disciples also adopted this position. Many companions of the Noble Prophet like
Ibn Abbas, Hazrat Ali, etc. also were of this opinion. Some have quoted companions like Abdullah
bin Mas'ud, Abdur Rahman bin'Auf and Zuber bin al-Awwam also adopting this position. Ahl-e-
Hadith also are of this opinion, i.e., that triple divorce is not valid. The Ithna 'Asharis (i.e., twelve
Shi'as) and Imamiyas believe that if three divorces are pronounced together, even one divorce does
not take place, let alone three. Even some Hanafi jurists like Hajjaj bin Artat and Muhammad Ibn
Muqatil believe that if one pronounces three divorces, no divorce will take place.Maulana 'Usmani
tells us that according to Muhammad Muqatil one of the two opinions of Imam Hanifa was that
only one divorce will take place if three divorces are pronounced. Similarly according to Imam
Tilmisani Imam Malik also held the opinion that only one divorce takes place if three divorces are
pronounced. Usmani also quotes from Hafiz Ibn Hajar's Fath al-Bari to the effect that many
eminent jurists held that if one pronounces three divorces, only one take place.From among the
'ulama of later period, Sheikh Shaltut, who was Sheikh al-Azhar, writes in his Fatwa that if one
gives three divorces, only one divorce Talaq-i-raj'i will take place and the husband will have the
right to take his wife back by saying so or by having sexual contact with her. Another prominent
'Alim 'Allama Rashid Rida' in his Tafsir al-Manar (Vol. IX, p. 683) has expressed a similar opinion.
Another contemporary eminent, Arab 'Alim Shaikh Jamal al-Din al-Qasim has discussed this
problem at great length in his book al-Istinas and has concluded that triple divorce has no validity
and it should be treated as one divorce only. Quoting all these authorities Maulana 'Usmani says
that triple divorce is not in keeping with the rulings of the Qur'an.After quoting all these authorities
Maulana 'Usmani discusses the whole issue in the light of the Noble Qur'an. He refers to the
Qur'anic verse 2: 229-30, which begins with Al-talaqu marratan, i.e., divorce may be pronounced
twice. He says the word marratan implies a gap between two pronouncements (all Hanafi jurists

6|Page
accept this), which means there should be a large enough time-gap between the two
pronouncements of divorce. Marratan (twice) itself carries this sense. When we say "I went to
your house twice but you were not there" cannot mean one went to his house twice in one go but
after some reasonable gap of time. Once he went, he was not there, then again he went, he was
not there. Thus the act of going had to be accomplished in two different periods of time. 'Usmani
then quotes other verses of the Qur'an where the word marratan occurs and explains that
everywhere it implies a gap of time in between.The question is despite triple divorce being sinful,
innovative and against the Qur'an will it occur if someone pronounces triple divorce? The second
question is did anyone make such mistake (of pronouncing triple divorce) in Prophet's (pbuh) time
and did he accept it as triple divorce? Or did he take it to be one divorce only? Lastly, when would
the practice of triple divorce start again?In the Qur'an, nikah is described as misaqan ghaliza, i.e.,
strong bond and has explained how and with whom one can enter into this strong bond and this
strong bond cannot be dissolved without proper reason and method. It certainly cannot be
dissolved whimsically. A man has to pass through different stages to bring about reconciliation
either by persuading his wife to behave properly, or by appointing arbitrators as
per Qur'anic injunctions (4:35). If all this fail only then recourse can be taken to divorce. Thus,
according to the Qur'an, divorce is not an arbitrary and whimsical thing. The method prescribed
by the Qur'an for divorce is that one can give divorce twice only, i.e., on two different occasions
and then either he has to keep the woman with kindness or leave her with benevolence. In pre-
Islamic Arab society they used to pronounce divorce even one thousand times and keep the sword
of divorce hanging on her head. The Qur'an disallowed it and permitted pronouncement of divorce
only twice. The Maulana says that even giving divorce in three periods of purity (pronouncing
divorce once in every period of purity thrice is also not proved by the Qur'an and is thus
prohibited. Once talaq is pronounced once, it takes place and woman goes out of marital bond at
once and is now free to marry other man after completing the period of 'iddah. Why then
pronounce talaq more than once? For what reason? Repeating the word more than once is just
absurd, says the Maulana. Talaq should not be pronounced more than once in any case.He then
takes up the second question-whether anyone had divorced thrice in the Prophet's period? And did
he accept it? He then quotes from Sahih Muslim, Imam Abu Da'ud, etc., to show that during the
Noble Prophet's time, during Hazrat Abu Bakr's time and for two years during Hazrat 'Umar's time
three divorces given at a time were taken as one divorce only. But after two years of

7|Page
his Khilafat period Hazrat 'Umar again enforced it (i.e., triple divorce) as people were misusing it
and there were several complaints.Maulana 'Usmani quotes from Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal that
once Rukanah pronounced three divorces against his wife but later he was very sorry for it. When
the Prophet (pbuh) asked him, How did you divorce your wife? Rukanah replied that he had
pronounced three divorces. The Prophet asked, Did you pronounce it in one sitting? When he said,
Yes, the Noble Prophet said, Treat it as one divorce only and if you want you can take your wife
back. And Rukanah took his wife back.This hadith of the Prophet narrated by Ibn Abbas is found
in Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu Da'ud and other authentic collections of Hadith literature. No one
has questioned its authenticity pertaining to marriage, divorce, inheritance or custody of
children. In certain respects his views on the treatment of women differs radically from other
traditional jurists. Also he bases his views entirely on the Qur'an and hadith, nothing else and
comes to entirely different conclusions from many other noted traditional jurists. The Maulana
has written his magnum opus Fiqh al-Qur'an in eight volumes. The book which is written in Urdu
is a veritable treasure of Islamic jurisprudence though it is written in a traditional style and full of
repetitions.Maulana 'Usmani points out that Hazrat 'Umar had enforced triple divorce as triple
divorce and it had become law. It is within the power of the caliph of the time to enforce certain
ordinances in view of the prevailing situation, or to meet some crisis situation and no one can
question it. It is, therefore, possible that Ibn Abbas might have given a fatwa accepting triple
divorce after Hazrat 'Umar enforced the ordinance. The original hadith, accepting three divorces
as one, therefore, is not affected, maintains 'Umar Ahmad 'Usmani. Thus it is proved by this hadith
that during the time of the Noble Prophet triple divorce, if pronounced by someone, was accepted
as one divorce only.Then the Maulana takes up the third question- when did the triple divorce
begin to be accepted as three divorces? It is well know that Hazrat 'Umar, after the initial two
years of his Khilafat, had enforced triple divorce as triple divorce and no one will be permitted to
take his wife back after pronouncing three divorces in one go. To substantiate his point the
Maulana refers to the noted Egyptian historian Muhammad Husain Haykal's book 'Umar al-
Farouq in which the author says that 'Umar made such an ijtihad (interpretation) in what is well
established Qur'anic injunction in 2: 229-30 (Divorce is twice … which we have discussed in
detail above) that until today we are opposing him in this matter. The Qur'an requires all attempts
for reconciliation before a divorce (4:35)Then Maulana 'Umar Ahmad further quotes from

8|Page
Haykal's book8 to show why Hazrat 'Umar was constrained to enforce triple divorce despite the
Qur'anic injunction contrary to it. Muhammad Haykal says that when the Arabs conquered Iraq,
Syria, Egypt, etc., the women prisoners from these regions were brought to Mecca and
Medina. These women were very attractive and charming and the Arabs were captivated by their
charm and wanted to marry them. But these women insisted on the men giving irreconcilable
divorce to their former wives. To satisfy them they would pronounce triple divorce and pretend
to having divorced their wives for good.

8
Maulana 'Umar Ahmad 'Usmani and Women's Rights in The Qur'an, Women and Modern Society, Asghar Ali
Engineer, Select Books, India, 1999

9|Page
2.4 History of Triple Talaq in India

In recent decades, the idea of uniformity and individual rights has been captured by Hindu
nationalist groups such as the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the RSS; the defence of personal law
and group rights has been heralded by Muslim conservatives consolidated under the All India
Muslim Personal Law Board. The monopolisation of these positions by predominantly male-
dominated socially conservative organisations is precisely the reason why the binary opposition
between individual and group rights become insufficient tools for analyses of family law.The
irregular treatment of muslim women seems to have began during the revision of the CrPC in 1973, when
the Board requested exemption from Section 125 relating to maintenance of wives, parents and children to
suggest that for Muslims, this should not include divorced wives. However, in the early 1980s, the courts
refused to accept such as exemption. Thus, while the Shah Bano case9 and the subsequent Muslim Women's
Act 1986 are cited as landmark judgements, a similar tone had been taken in a number of preceding
judgements which offered a wider interpretation of personal law itself instead of recommending a uniform
code. The courts had historically been clandestinely (as in Bai Tahira and Fazlunbi Biwi cases) or overtly
(as in Danial Latifi case) attaining uniformity through judgements. After 1986, the Muslim Women's
Protection of Rights on Divorce Act has also been applied and interpreted by many courts in line with the
"protection" that the Act promised. However, even these protections offered in sporadic judgements have
proved to be insufficient. The Board's position was further consolidated as the issue of the Babri mosque
was re-launched in the 1986-87,thereby making the expression of any differences within the Muslim
community appear unwise and ill-timed.The new women's movements of the late 1990s and early 2000s
therefore began inching towards universal principles of equality and justice in interpretation of "religion"
rather than hoping legislative changes or relief from courts alone. Founding members of BMMA10,
Noorjahan Safia Niaz and Zakia Soman declared that most of the practices propagated as "Islamic law"
were divorced from the Holy Quran, and the movement positioned itself against triple-talaq and polygamy
on purely religious grounds. This was echoed by other civil society initiatives such as Bebaak Collective
and Awaaz-e-Niswan.These movements however have also received criticism as the Indian left began to
assume a position of 'status-quo' on Muslim personal law or even offer a defence for bigamy, a position

9 Mohd. Ahmed Khan vs Shah Bano Begum And Ors 1985 AIR 945, 1985 SCR (3) 844

10 Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan

10 | P a g e
that had historically been endorsed by the Hindu Mahasabha and now the All India Muslim Personal Law
Board. The key difference in stance on bigamy, however, was that the women's groups hoped to defend the
rights of the "second wife" who the courts and community continued to view as dishonourable - a
"concubine", "keep" or a "mistress" (D Velusamy v. D Patchaiammal)11, while the latter offer patronising
arguments such as "better divorced than murdered'', or "better in a bigamous household than destitute".
There remain contentions within the women's movement but the twenty-first century has highlighted both
the uncertainty of uniformity and yet a strong desire for change. Such a dialogue has, in fact, produced a
model of legal pluralism which has the potential of becoming instructive to rest of the world, if cultural
rights and personal laws could indeed be reconciled with fundamental rights and freedoms.By 2004, with
the significant intervention of instituting the Sachar Committee for reviewing the status of Muslims in India,
the fear of a wholesale abolition of personal laws was somewhat allayed. This was visible in the breaking
of the AIMPLB consensus as in 2005, the Board split into Shia and Sunni groups; the All India Women's
Personal Law Board was also founded in the same year. Thus, the last few years have witnessed a demand
for codification and legal protections from within communities. These demands have not only served to
fracture the monolithic idea of a "community" but also challenged who the nation has historically accepted
as "representatives" of a community.In 2016, Shayara Bano alleged that her husband subjected her to much
cruelty including taunts for inadequate dowry, forced abortions, and eventually an arbitrary unilateral
divorce. Although the press poetically reported about the case as "From Shah Bano to Shayara Bano", the
facts of the case share more with the lesser known Parveen Akhtar case of 1992, where the petitioner does
not merely question "maintenance upon divorce" but rather what the "true" Islamic position on such type
of divorce is. Talaq-e-bidat by its definition (bidat) indicates a "customary" or an "irregular" practice. The
case argued that misinterpretation of Islamic laws deprived women of their right to "freedom of religion".
Thus, revision or reform became more favourable options rather than a wholesale replacement of personal
laws.12In 2015, while the BJP spoke of revision of personal laws through a uniform civil code, and in August
2016, an activist-turned-politician of the Congress Party, Husain Dalwai introduced a private members bill
in Parliament specifically challenging triple-talaq. Thus, whether we are advocates of uniformity, equality
or plurality, there appears to be an undeniable desire for change among all political parties and most social

11 10 SCC 469

12 How We Got To This Point In The Triple Talaq Debate, Saumya Saxena

11 | P a g e
movements. A uniform civil code or a review of personal law will therefore serve a similar end through
two distinct routes.

12 | P a g e
CHAPTER- II CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF TRIPLE TALAQ

1. Judicial considerations

Just like the ongoing debate about the Muslim personal law’s concept of having four wives, the
constitutional validity of Triple Talaq has also been challenged on many an occasion. The injustice
caused by this practice to unsuspecting women was most recently brought to the spotlight in the case
of A.S. Parveen Akhtar v. Union of India .13In this case, Ms. Parveen’s husband demanded additional
dowry in the form of a scooter. On Ms. Parveen’s family’s inability to oblige towards the demand, she
was thrown out of the house by her husband. After living in a local ladies’ hostel for a few days, Ms.
Parveen was intimidated by her father that her husband had divorced her by way of Triple Talaq.The
arguments made on behalf of the petitioner in this case were that this practice violated human rights
and the principles of natural justice. Furthermore, it was argued that the practice was unconstitutional
as it went against:(i) Article 14: Equality before law – The state shall not deny to any person equality
before the law or the equal protection of laws within the territory of India.(ii) Article 15: Discrimination
on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth – The state shall not discriminate against any
citizen on grounds only of religion, race, sex, place of birth ir any of them.(iii) Article 21: Protection
of Life and Personal Liberty – No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except
according to the procedure established by law.The Quran, the holy book of Muslims, does not recognize
Talaq-ul-Biddat and considers it to be a spiritual offence. It directs that both parties in a marriage must
make all attempts at reconciliation before declaring a divorce as irrevocable. Thus, legalizing the
practice of triple talaq only surmounts to an impediment in the right of a Muslim woman to practice
and profess her religion, by unleashing a spiritual offence upon her and violating Article 25 of the
Constitution which states that another pre-requisite to any divorce is that it must not be whimsical and
must be preceded by several attempts to reconcile. It must be the last resort in a failing marital
relationship, which Talaq-ul-Biddat does not allow. Also, it can only be used by the husband and the
wife has no say in the process. This makes this practice a gross atrocity towards Muslim women and
their fundamental rights.It is undeniable that in this scenario, a Muslim woman is helpless against the
decades of unfair practices. Not only can the wife be divorced by her husband for any reason, upon his
whims and fancies, but she is also denied Mehr (a form of compensation provided by the husband to a
divorced woman to aid her independence after marriage). It, thus, falls upon the courts to act as
torchbearers of justice and curb this unjust practice at the earliest.There is also the fact that most Muslim
women are betrothed when they are young (many even before the age of seven years). If a Muslim man

13
High Court of Madras, December 2002, Writ petition 744 of 1992

13 | P a g e
 decides to divorce his wife when she is young or simply a minor, it leaves the girl vulnerable, especially
without the Mehr amount. Also, remarrying a divorced woman is still a taboo concept in Muslim
personal law and hence, many a times, a divorced woman has to spend the rest of her life on her own
and often bear hefty expenses towards the upbringing of her children. Remarriage of a divorced woman
is not easy even if both parties are willing, as in most cases, all expenses of the marriage have to be
borne by the bride and the divorced woman’s parents seldom shell out that kind of expenses.The system
of triple talaq, ultimately, puts unfair power in the hands of Muslim men. When a man is allowed to
marry and divorce as many women as he wishes (and can even be married to four women at any point
of time), with no authority having the right to question him about his actions, women tend to become
an expendable commodity for him. And in this day and age, when every social and political forum is
striving to achieve gender equality, it leaves the Muslim women unarmed and vulnerable.India is a
secular country and probably has the most number of religious sects living within it. By the nature of
laws in India, personal laws are highly regarded and given supreme importance. But if any such
personal laws extend beyond its scope and advocates, in effect, the violation of basic human rights, it
can be struck down by the apex court. The abolition of the ritual of ‘Sati’ and the more recent Haji Ali
Dargah judgement 14 are two such examples. In fact, the middle east countries do not have any existing
provision regarding triple talaq. It goes by no extraordinary stretch of imagination that India too would
do well to follow suit.Even if the Supreme Court is apprehensive about striking down the part of the
Muslim personal laws that permit triple talaq and declare it unconstitutional, it can add a provision to
the existing law such that there is a period of waiting (at least one menstrual period) between each
consecutive talaq declaration. This will help provide both the parties in a marriage, sufficient time to
make efforts towards reconciliation and will also ward off accidental divorces that cannot otherwise be
undone. Additionally, if the provision is amended to ensure that Muslim men provide a valid reason for
opting for triple talaq and provide the Mehr amount to the wife, then we can have some semblance of
a divorce law that does not violate fundamental rights and is ,gender neutral.

14
HC of Bombay, PIL no. 106 of 2014

14 | P a g e
 2. Gender Parity

The regressive practice employed by Muslim men to divorce their wives instantly without their
consent, by uttering the word ‘talaq’ thrice has been in practice in India for many years now.
Several Muslim women were forced to accept the discriminatory Triple Talaq Sharia law
owing to pressure from certain elements from within the society.Over the past many years
several cases have been reported, where women have undergone severe trauma after being
abandoned and thrown out of homes by their husbands.Shayara Bano,15 one such victim of this
primitive custom, filed a PIL in the Supreme Court seeking a ban on the practice, and it has
been going on since then. the Modi government filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court
officially opposing Triple Talaq.The government has stated that gender equality is non-
negotiable. The government also stated that polygamy and triple talaq do not adhere to
constitutional values and therefore cannot be accepted.However, the Muslim law board has
been opposing its abolition saying that triple talaq is a 'personal law' and hence cannot be
modified by the Centre.There is something naturally perverse about a husband being given the
right to annul his marriage unilaterally by merely uttering the word ‘talaq’ thrice. It does not
require an Islamic cleric or a constitutional scholar to find this practice abhorrent,
discriminatory and disrespectful of women. It was thus little surprise that the Supreme Court
outlawed instant triple talaq, a judgment hailed for empowering women in their struggle for
gender equality. But that is unfortunately where praise for the judgment must begin and end.
Scarcely has a judgment with such a progressive outcome been underpinned by such regressive
reasoning. The dissenting opinion of Chief Justice Khehar and Justice Nazeer considers triple
talaq, despite being discriminatory, to be protected by freedom of religion in the Constitution.
To offset this result, they recommend legislation by Parliament on this issue and before such
legislation, prevent Muslim husbands from pronouncing triple talaq.Justices Nariman and
Lalit, in their majority view, consider Sharia law to have been statutorily incorporated by the
Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937. Given that all laws enacted by the
legislature have to be in conformity with the Constitution, they hold Section 2 of the Act, to
the extent that it enforces triple talaq, to be arbitrary. Justice Kurian, the swing vote, agrees
with the conclusion of the majority that triple talaq is invalid. However he comes to this

15
Supreme Court WP no. 118 of 2016

15 | P a g e
conclusion not on constitutional grounds, but pursuant to an ecclesiastical finding that triple
talaq has no basis in the Quran.The dissenting opinion is surely astonishing. If personal law
can be constitutionally protected, then it is commonsensical that such personal law can also be
challenged on constitutional grounds. Further, if it is constitutionally protected, neither can a
Muslim husband be disallowed from exercising his fundamental right to pronounce triple talaq
nor can Parliament be expected to come up with a law that says otherwise.On the contrary
Justice Kurian’s swing vote holds, arguably correctly, that instant triple talaq is against the
tenets of the Quran and consequently not part of Sharia law. Given it is not part of Sharia law,
he considers it outlawed by the Act and hence invalid. To resolve the matter at hand, this is
sufficient. However, as an approach to resolving knotty questions of personal law, this enquiry
would require judges to delve deep into religious texts to ascertain their true meaning.The
hazards of such an exercise are well-known to the judiciary from what followed in the
aftermath of the Shah Bano judgment (1985). Sacrificing constitutional adjudication at the altar
of religious pontification from the Bench is an unwitting dilution of the supremacy of the
Constitution.In contrast, a more conscious dilution of the supremacy of the Constitution takes
place in the majority opinion of Justices Nariman and Lalit. By holding that the Court has the
power to strike down parliamentary legislation as arbitrary under Article 14, it has converted
a question of the rights of Muslim women into a contest for one-upmanship with Parliament.
This is not what a landmark judgment for gender equality looks like – on the contrary its
express silence on the core question of discrimination, speaks louder than its words.Even when
it has spoken – to partially outlaw Section 2 of the Act as arbitrary – it is conceptually flawed.
Its finding compounds a conceptual misadventure that began with Justice Bhagwati’s view in
Royappa (1973). Royappa held that governmental action could be challenged as arbitrary under
Article 14 because the right to equality, enshrined in Article 14 mandated the rule of law, which
was the antithesis of arbitrary state action.Two examples demonstrate why bringing
arbitrariness in through the backdoor of equality in Article 14 was faulty. If all spectrum
licenses are cancelled with inadequate reasons by the state it is arbitrary, but hardly an act of
inequality; conversely if universities have different rules for men and women in the interest of
safety, the rules are unequal, but hardly arbitrary. Simply put, equality and arbitrariness are not
the same thing.Using arbitrariness as a sword to scythe through parliamentary legislation, risks
the danger of collapsing the whole of the Constitution into one article. If Article 14 means

16 | P a g e
arbitrariness and arbitrariness means nothing but the rule of law, then simply replacing the
mass of provisions with Article 14 should do. This result means that the Damocles’ sword of
a free-floating judicial determination of arbitrariness now hangs over every parliamentary and
state legislation in this country.In terms of upsetting separation of powers and arrogating
powers to itself, this judgment trumps even the NJAC case. Politicians in a celebratory mood
would be well-served to recognise that the Constitution is no longer supreme, the judges are.In
the final analysis, it is a telling comment that in a judgment celebrated as a landmark victory
for women’s rights, none of the judges find the provision of triple talaq discriminatory against
women. On a matter critical to the lives of women in India, when five male judges of the
Supreme Court rule on arcane questions of constitutional and ecclesiastical law instead of
calling out personal laws as discriminatory, one knows that even if a victory has been achieved,
the battle for gender equality will continue to remain a long and hard one.

17 | P a g e
 CHAPTER- III CURRENT SCENARIO

1. How Triple talaq became a mainstream concern

Here is a look at four women who have suffered at the hands of the egregious Sharia law
and how they were given ‘talaq’:

Shayara Bano, whose petition sparked Triple Talaq abolition movement. Shayara Bano,
who catapulted into national headlines with her petition in the Supreme Court questioning the
legality of triple talaq, told that she was forced to go to the SC against all odds because she
could "no longer bear the ordeal".The 37-year-old post graduate in sociology
from Kashipur in Udham Singh Nagar district, said she just wants "justice and move on with
my life."Alleging that she was made to undergo as many as six abortions by her husband who
forcibly administered her pills which ruined her health, the mother of two said she longed to
be with her children who are still with her husband.Bano's husband, Rizwan Ahmed, had
summarily posted a 'talaqnama' to her in October, which led to her taking recourse to the
judiciary to get the triple talaq or talaq-e-bidat (verbal pronouncement of talaq) declared
illegal. The case grabbed attention when the SC admitted her petition seeking triple talaq be
declared unconstitutional .16

Afreen Rehman given ‘talaq’ via Speed Post25-year-old Afreen Rehman got the shock of
her life after she received a mail that too not just via regular mail but through 'Speed Post'. It
was a divorce, or to be precise, 'triple talaq'.

The young woman, moved to the Supreme Court against Islam's 'triple talaq' provision.
what afreen had to say about triple Talaq is:-
“I have received speed post announcing divorce. This is completely wrong, unfair and
unacceptable. I have filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking its intervention into the
matter.”17‘

16
The Hindu, Editorial 22nd August 2017
17
The Hindu, Editorial 22nd August 2017

18 | P a g e
 Triple talaq’ via WhatsAppTen days after her marriage, a 21-year-old BDS student's groom
left for Dubai. After remaining incommunicado for over three weeks, he sent her a message —
“triple talaq” — over WhatsApp.

The unexpected talaq shattered the woman and her family. Both she and her sister, a Plus Two
student, had to drop out of their classes.

Overcoming the initial shock, the young woman lodged a complaint at the state women's
commission's adalat in Pala, Kottayam.18

30-year-old divorced on phoneA 30-year-old woman’s husband demanded a divorce over the
phone. she alleged that her husband hounded her after he questioned her for not giving birth to
a boy."He was not satisfied and he wanted to have another son.Her children, three daughters
and one son, were also taken away from her by her husband, she claims.The woman has also
leveled charges of molestation against her husband's elder brother.Multiple complaints
were filed with the Howrah Police but no action was ever taken by the cops.19

18
The Hindu, Editorial 22nd August 2017
19
The Hindu, Editorial 22nd August 2017

19 | P a g e
2. Ruling of the Supreme Court

Thanks to the historic judgement of a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court declaring the
practice of unilateral divorce (also known as triple talaq or talaq-e-
biddat) unconstitutional, it is now unequivocally established that the practice – which runs
counter to the gender jurisprudence evolved by the Supreme Court, the principles of
equality as ordained in the constitution, international human rights law and the Quran – is
not fundamental to the religion of Islam in India.The Supreme Court has consulted and cited
the laws of as many as 19 countries including Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey and other nation-
states from the Arab peninsula, South-East Asia, and South Asia that have abolished triple
talaq. Arab countries such as United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Kuwait, Algeria, Iraq, Jordan,
Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia and Yemen have enacted laws against the
practice of triple talaq.Triple talaq is not Islamic and is a departure and deviation from the
tenets of the Quran to undermine the rights of Muslim women. The beginning of the social
justice movement against triple talaq started on April 18, 1966 in Maharashtra for protecting
the rights of Muslim women.This judgment is not against any institution, organisation nor
it is against the religion of Islam. Rather, the true meaning and spirit of the Qur an has been
outlined on the anvil of individualism, the rule of law and human rights enunciated in the
constitution. It is a judgment in favour of justice based on women’s rights as human
rights that have been denied to Muslim women for centuries despite Quranic provisions
relating to gender and spousal equality in wedlock and beyond. The Quran does not sanction
triple talaq in one go. According to Islamic scripture, the word talaq is spoken thrice over a
period of three months. In such a manner, it demands time and patience in executing a
divorce in the hope of making the union possible knowing that the couple is bound to have
differences. This Quranic procedure has been laid down with a rationale to establish that
marital coverture cannot be terminated in a state of sudden provocation, rage or
whims.During the life of Prophet Muhammad, three utterances of talaq in one sitting used
to be treated as one statement. But the second Caliph of Islam, Hazrat Umar, due to
administrative reasons, had taken a different view of triple talaq to bind Muslim men who
rush into instant divorce by uttering the word talaq three times in one go. This step by the
second Caliph was against the principles of the Quran. However, Caliph Umar had

20 | P a g e
discouraged the impugned practice by flogging the men who resorted to triple talaq.
Unfortunately, the practice of triple talaq got embedded into Sharia or Islamic law due to
the strict interpretation rendered by the later Imams, particularly Imam Abu Hanifa and has
been presented by the Muslim clerics as an inalienable part of the Islamic law.Headed by
Chief Justice J.S. Khehar and other justices U.U. Lalit, S. Abdul Nazeer, Kurian Joseph,
and R.F. Nariman, the bench had heard seven petitions including the five individual
petitions filed by Muslim women challenging the practice of triple talaq. Primarily, the
women contended that the practice of triple talaq is unconstitutional and has attained the
ugliest form since triple talaq is now being pronounced by an SMS, on the phone and over
email. The Supreme Court has observed that the practice of triple talaq is the “worst” and
“not a desirable” form of Muslim marriage dissolution barring few exceptions of its
acceptance in some schools of Muslim law. The noted jurist Ram Jethmalani termed the
practice “abhorrent” and discriminatory on the ground of sex against the constitutional right
to equality. He said it violates the tenets of the Quran, and no volume of advocacy can justify
its retention. The government, on its part, went beyond this position and designated all forms
of talaq provided in the Quran – such as Talaq-e-Hasan and Talaq-e-Ahsan – as “unilateral”
and “extrajudicial” and thus inconsistent with the constitution of India.On the other side,
the AIMPLB behaved arrogantly and irresponsibly and did not come out with any credible
proposal during the hearing of the case despite the fact that there was opposition to this
abhorrent practice in the Muslim community. Therefore, the Supreme Court corrected
a historical wrong of gender discrimination that was patriarchal, bad in theology and sinful,
and reformed the miasma that was imposed upon Muslim women.The Supreme Court, for
the first time, has made Articles 25 and 26 of the constitution of India “absolute”, despite
these being subjected to restrictions. However, the triple talaq judgment has not been a
unanimous decision. Two judges dissented, including Chief Justice Khehar, who regarded
triple talaq as an inalienable part of Muslim personal law in India and opined that the
practice does not contravene Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the constitution. However, the
dissenting judges have taken a cautious approach to balancing the whole gamut of triple
talaq by outlining the fact that the practice is not prevalent even in Muslim
theocracies.Political discourse on triple talaq must now be set at rest and the Supreme
Court’s decision must be taken in its letter and spirit without brooking any pressure from

21 | P a g e
organisations like the AIMPLB who played the politics of procrastination on this issue. The
AIMPLB is not an elected body and does not represent the diversity among the Indian
Muslims in their religious practices and beliefs. Among Indian Muslims, 90% are Sunni
Hanafi and the remaining 10% belong to Ahle-Hadees and Shafaiis. The Shafaiis support
the Hanafi stand on the validity of triple talaq. However, Ahle-Hadees does not subscribe
to the practice. Moreover, the judgment has clarified that all personal laws must conform to
the constitution and its mandate on matters relating to marriage, divorce, property and
succession. It has rightly been contented by the government before the Supreme Court that
it is not a “majority v. minority” narrative but an intra-community tug of war between
fundamentalists and deprived Muslim women.Political will at the highest level of the
government is required to take necessary measures for enforcing the judicial dicta. August
22, 201720 would be regarded a defining moment and turning point in the judicial history of
India when gender equality for Muslim women took a definite step forward. India’s Muslim
women have achieved what was considered unattainable since independence. The Supreme
Court’s decision has established the supremacy of constitutional guarantees in upholding
gender equality in relationships within the religious structures of Islam.

2.1 Status before the judgment

It is significant to state that the sketch before the passing of the judgment was very gloomy,
the husbands were very inhuman against their wifes. In many cases husbands pronounced triple
talaq for flimsy reasons and later regretted. Upon which they asked the wifes to go through
‘Nikah Halala’ so that they could remarry, because of illiteracy and social bounds women’s
had no recourse available except to go through it. The custom of “nikah Halala” was so harsh
that it ripped off the soul of the women. In many reported cases, the husband at first forced the
wife to go through ‘nikah Halala’ and later refused to remarry. This left women in shock, but
they were amputated by the custom to take any step.

2.2 Is the custom of ‘Nikah Halala’ still prevalent?

20 Shayara Bano vs Union Of India And Ors.

22 | P a g e
It is crucial to enumerate that because the supreme court has solidified in his verdict that the
talaq-ul-Biddat or the instantaneous form of talaq is invalid,it means that it cannot pose any
effect over the marriage in any way, therefore the wifes cannot be forced to go through the
process of nikah Halala, even if the husband pronounces triple talaq or talaq-ul-Biddat.

2.3 Has the practice discontinued?

It would be impractical to state that after the release of the judgment the practice has ceased
completely. As per the minister of law, Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad, there has been around
approximately 66 reported cases from various parts of the country after the release of the
judgment on the 22nd of August 2017. It can be ascertained that there is a possibility of many
cases which might have gone unreported. So it can be concluded that many might be practicing
it in the dark. But after the release of the judgment, one thing is for sure that the women have
got encouraged and have gained the strength of standing against this barbaric and inhuman act
of the men.The practice of triple talaq is heavily assimilated in the Muslim culture, and it is
difficult to immediately wipe it. As the abovementioned para states that statistics of the
reported cases after the release of the judgment. So there is a need of educating the Muslim
women in this regard so that they can speak against it. It is suggestive that the victim must
build the courage and must either contact the police or some women-oriented NGO, but she
must not suffer it silently.

2.4 What about the validity of ‘other’ form of talaq such as talaq-e-Sunnat, khula,
etc?

It is pertinent to mention that it is ONLY ‘talaq-ul-Biddat’ which has been declared as

unconstitutional and not any other form talaq. As there are numerous forms of talaq which the
Shariat law has defined, and no other except for talaq-ul-Biddat or instantaneous talaq has got
nullified by the court. It means that the rest of the practices such as khula, talaq-e-Sunnat is
still constitutional and therefore if the husband or the wife practices any other form of talaq
which the Shariat enumerates then it shall affect the marriage.

2.5 What about the other barbarous practices such as ‘nikah Halala’?

23 | P a g e
 Although it is a strong step taken by the court to take away the force of law from the practice
of talaq-ul-Biddat, the holistic approach is still lacking as a lot of problems still needs the
judicial address. Customs such as nikah Halala, have not yet received any address from the
court of law. It is needed that other practices such as polygamy, minors marriage or marriage
with huge age gap must also be looked up by the court.

2.6 Does DAR-UL-QAZA stand with this verdict?

DAR-UL-QAZA refers to the Islamic family courts. It is a forum of mediation. If the parties
agree then the forum can act for arbitration as referred in the Shamim ara and the recent
judgment. After the release of the landmark judgment, the DAR-UL-QAZA is not entitled to
validate the instantaneous or unilateral talaq. Although the Islamic court is empowered to
facilitate the amicable settlement of khula. However, the recent judgment falls short of devising
a mechanism which the other Muslim countries have implemented for declaring the divorce.
Therefore it is suggestive that the dar-ul-Qaza must be empowered to allow divorces of
irrevocable nature.The supreme court in Shamim Ara case (2002), the talaq must be for
reasonable cause and attempts of reconciliation must be taken by the families of the husband
and wife. And because the instant talaq doesn’t offer the conciliation, it shall not be
appropriate.21

2.7 Is the bill comprehensive?

Though the government has exhibited the intolerant approach towards this taboo by making it
a NON-BAILABLE and COGNIZABLE OFFENCE and attaching a penalty and
imprisonment up to three years. But it fails to submit alternative methods to it. The bill must
provide the procedure of divorce which is not cruel to either party. They must adopt talaq-e-
Ahsan which is regarded as the most proper method of divorce and was also professed by the
Prophet. Further, it must also involve reconciliation and mediation between husband and wife
lasting for minimum 90 days.Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Association, the forefront association
to battle against triple talaq has developed a method of divorce based on Quran. The proposal

21 Current status of Triple Talaq, Mansi Agnihotri

24 | P a g e
has been prepared and has been sent to the government. Now the rest lies with the parliament
to accept it or reject it, whatever they opt it must be hard enough to eliminate it from Indian
society.

25 | P a g e
3. Triple Talaq in other Nations

 Pakistan: The Muslim Family Laws Ordinance was passed in 1961, under which, a man
seeking divorce has to pronounce talaq and approach the chairman of the state-appointed Union
Council, which then takes the case forward for arbitration and possible reconciliation.
 Morocco: The Moroccan Family Code, which was passed in 2004, gives equal rights to the
husband and wife.
 Egypt: The first country to bring changes in its divorce system, Egypt implemented the reforms
based on the interpretation of the Quran by 13th century scholar Ibn Taymiyyah. According to
him, saying talaq three times in one go accounts for only one step in the process, which is
followed by a 90-day waiting period.
 Tunisia: According to the Tunisian Code of Personal Status, 1956, a man cannot divorce his
wife verbally without consulting a judge.
 Sri Lanka: As per Sri Lanka's Marriage and Divorce (Muslim) Act, 1951, a man who wants
to divorce his wife has to first give notice to the Muslim judge, who, along with the couple's
relatives and other Muslims, tries reconciliation.
 Iraq: According to Iraq's Personal Status law, "three verbal repudiations pronounced at once
will count as only one divorce."

26 | P a g e
CHAPTER IV- LEGISLATIVE STATUS OF TRIPLE TALAQ

1. TRIPLE TALAQ BILL

In a majority 3:2 judgment, the Supreme Court set aside instant talaq as a "manifestly arbitrary"
practice. The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017 was introduced in the Lok
Sabha, and was taken up for consideration and passing. This Bill, which makes instant triple talaq or talaq-
e-biddat a punishable offence, followed the Supreme Court judgment on August 22, 2017 in the case of
Shayara Bano vs. Union of India.In a majority 3:2 judgment the apex court set aside instant talaq as a
"manifestly arbitrary" practice. It also said, "Given the fact that Triple Talaq is instant and irrevocable, it is
obvious that any attempt at reconciliation between the husband and wife by two arbiters from their families,
which is essential to save the marital tie, cannot ever take place."

1.1 What does the Bill say?

It makes the pronouncement of talaq-e-biddat "void and illegal." According to clause 3 of the Bill, "Any
pronouncement of talaq by a person upon his wife, by words, either spoken or written or in electronic
form or in any other manner whatsoever, shall be void and illegal."

1.2 What is the proposed punitive measure?

A man who pronounces talaq on his wife will be punished with a jail term and a fine. This Bill also
makes the pronouncement of talaq-e-biddat a non-bailable offence.Clause 4 of the Bill states, "Whoever
pronounces talaq referred to in section 3 upon his wife shall be punished with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to three years and fine."Clause 7 says, "an offence punishable under this Act shall
be cognizable and non-bailable within the meaning of the Code." (The Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973)

1.3 How does this protect Muslim women's rights?

The woman upon whom talaq is pronounced will have to receive an allowance from her husband, and
she retains custody of her children.Clauses 5 and 6 of the Bill say, " a married Muslim woman upon
whom talaq is pronounced, shall be entitled to receive from her husband such amount of subsistence
allowance for her and dependent children," and "shall be entitled to custody of her minor children in
the event of pronouncement of talaq by her husband."Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, in the
statement of objects and reasons attached to the Bill says that this legislation will, "help in ensuring the

27 | P a g e
 larger Constitutional goals of gender justice and gender equality of married Muslim women and help
subserve their fundamental rights of non-discrimination and empowerment."

2 CRITICISM FACED BY THE BILL

The Bill in its current form has many procedural and legal infirmities.22The Prime
Minister’s lament to the outgoing Rajya Sabha MPs that they missed out on an opportunity to debate
important issues such as the triple talaq Bill — the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage)
Bill, 2017 — due to disruptions is an indication that despite widespread public opinion against it, the
Centre is inordinately keen on making it a law.What defies comprehension is the refusal of the Central
government to appreciate the legal point that no person can be jailed for an act that is not a crime. The
Supreme Court, in Shayara Bano v. Union Of India (2017), had set aside the validity of instant talaq
(talaq-e-biddat), thus rendering its pronouncement ineffective in dissolving a marriage. Yet this Bill
makes the pronouncement punishable with a three-year imprisonment without realising that such an
arbitrary exercise of legislative power is liable to be judicially reviewed and struck down for violating
the principles of natural justice and rule of law.

2.1 An unjust recommendation

Interest in the triple talaq Bill has also been sustained by the erroneous belief held by some women’s
organisations that the pronouncement of talaq-e-biddat could be brought under the definition of
emotional abuse mentioned in Section 3 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,
2005 (PWDVA).23The PWDVA brings “verbal and emotional abuse” under domestic violence and
defines it as: “a) insults, ridicule, humiliation, name calling and insults or ridicule specially with regard
to not having a child or a male child; b) repeated threats to cause physical pain to any person in whom
the aggrieved person is interested.”After its invalidation by the apex court, instant talaq comes nowhere
near this definition. It will constitute abuse only if it is accompanied by the forcible removal of the wife
from the matrimonial home, or her abandonment. But the Bill criminalises talaq-e-biddat even if it is
not followed by eviction or desertion of the wife.And as per Section 31 of the PWDVA, a person who
indulges in domestic violence to the prima facie satisfaction of the magistrate can ultimately be
punished with imprisonment which may extend to one year, or with a maximum fine of ₹20,000, or
with both if he violates the “protection order” issued by the magistrate under Section 18 of the Act.A

22 A case to withdraw the triple talaq Bill, A. Faizur Rahman

23
A case to withdraw the triple talaq Bill, A. Faizur Rahman
28 | P a g e
 protection order is meant not only to prohibit the accused from committing any act of domestic violence,
it can also stop him from entering the place of employment of the aggrieved person, or attempting to
communicate with her in any form. In addition, the magistrate can also pass a “residence order” under
Section 19 inter alia directing the accused to remove himself from the shared household and restraining
him or any of his relatives from entering any portion of the shared household in which the aggrieved
person resides.Most importantly, Section 32 declares that a breach of the protection order is a
cognisable and non-bailable offence which the magistrate may conclude to have been committed by
the accused on the “sole testimony of the aggrieved person.”Indeed as per Section 4, “any person” who
has reason to believe that an act of domestic violence has been, or is likely to be, committed can give
information about it to the Protection Officer concerned. No liability, civil or criminal, shall be incurred
by that person for giving the information in good faith.It is astonishing that those who want talaq-e-
biddat, which can no longer be used to threaten a wife into submission, to be declared an act of
“domestic violence” fail to realise that innocent men could be forced to undergo the aforementioned
humiliating punishments reserved for cognisable and non-bailable offences. Can any recommendation
be more unjust and anti-therapeutic in nature?

2.2 Personal liberty

But the most significant ground on which the triple talaq Bill fails the test of constitutionality is found
in Article 21 which states that “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except
according to procedure established by law.”24In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), a seven-
judge Constitution Bench ruled that fairness is implicit in the phrase “procedure established by law”
and therefore, the procedure should be “fair, just and reasonable, not fanciful, oppressive or arbitrary”;
otherwise it would be no procedure at all and the requirement of Article 21 would not be satisfied. The
court also clarified that “law” means reasonable law, not any enacted piece.Endorsing this view, the
Supreme Court, in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017), said that “a law which provides
for a deprivation of life or personal liberty under Article 21 must lay down not just any procedure but
a procedure which is fair, just and reasonable” and that “the validity of a law which infringes the
fundamental rights has to be tested not with reference to the object of state action but on the basis of its
effect on the guarantees of freedom.”Earlier, the same was emphasised in stronger words by Justice V.
Krishna Iyer in Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration (1978): “True our Constitution has no ‘due process’
clause or the VIII Amendment; but, in this branch of law, after Cooper and Maneka Gandhi the
consequence is the same. For what is punitively outrageous, scandalizingly unusual or cruel and

24
Ibid

29 | P a g e
rehabilitatively counterproductive, is unarguably unreasonable and arbitrary and is shot down by Art.
14 and 19, and if inflicted with procedural unfairness, falls foul of Art. 21.”Seen in the light of these
categorical pronouncements, the procedure imposing penal imprisonment for talaq-e-biddat in the
proposed Bill is not just unfair and unreasonable but is also, to paraphrase a view of the U.S. Supreme
Court (quoted in Law, Hermeneutics and Rhetoric by Francis J. Mootz III), so totally without
penological justification that it would result in the gratuitous infliction of suffering on a person for
doing nothing more than utter words rendered harmless by the Supreme Court.This unwarranted
punitive deprivation of personal liberty also runs afoul of Article 19, especially clauses 19(1)d and
19(1)g which allow all citizens “to move freely throughout the territory of India” and “practise any
profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.” Thus, if a man is unjustifiably jailed under
the proposed law even for a few weeks, he will be denied of these rights for that period, to say nothing
about the dim prospects of securing a job after the stigmatising confinement.Given these procedural
and legal infirmities, the chances of the triple talaq Bill being judicially challenged when it becomes
law are high. This apart, the Centre has completely ignored the fact that the passage of the Bill in the
Lok Sabha has unwittingly pushed Muslim women towards the All India Muslim Personal Law Board
if one were to go by the recent massive demonstrations against it across India.The only way to remedy
the situation is for the government to withdraw the Bill.

30 | P a g e
3. Why the bill didn’t make it through Rajya Sabha

Amidst protests from a few political parties, including those close to the BJP, the Lok Sabha on
December 28th 2017 passed by voice vote the Triple Talaq Bill, that made instant triple talaq or talaq-
e-biddat a criminal offence, with a jail term of up to three years.The proposed law would make instant
talaq punishable and would be a cognisable, non-bailable offence.Calling it a historic step, Union Law
Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad said the Bill — The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage)
Bill 2017 — will act as a deterrent since there have been 100 cases of triple talaq even after the landmark
judgment of the Supreme Court delivered in August 2017.The Minister turned down demands from the
Leader of the Congress in the Lok Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge to refer the Bill to the Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Law and Justice.Lack of support from parties such as BJD, AIADMK, etc
impacted the bill's smooth passage in the Rajya Sabha as the Opposition had more numbers than the
NDA.E.T. Mohammed Basheer of the Indian Union Muslim League and Asaduddin Owaisi of the
AIMIM alleged that through the Bill the government was trying to bring in a Uniform Civil
Code.Speaking on behalf of her party, BJP MP Meenakshi Lekhi made an impassioned appeal in
support of the bill and attacked the Congress by reminding the party that it had opposed the Shah Bano
judgement of the Supreme Court in 1986.“They were opposed to an allowance of ₹125 in the Shah
Bano case and our Muslim sisters and the country suffered. After a gap of 30 years, there is an
opportunity to correct it,” said Ms. Lekhi.Members opposed to the Bill voiced three major concerns,
arguing that the Opposition to the bill could be categorised as expressing three major concerns. Most
of the opposing parties argued that the Bill had legal flaws and was being passed in hurry.Many parties
who in principle supported the bill expressed concerns about making the civil issue of instant divorce
a criminal offence and with little scope of reconciliation.“Every family dispute should not result in a
criminal action,” said Supriya Sule of the Nationalist Congress Party.Some political parties feared that
the bill was politically motivated and encroached on Muslim personal law.

31 | P a g e
 4. Questions Raised against the Bill

The core question that has arose against the Triple Talaq bill in the Rajya Sabha, is whether resorting
to an illegal and arbitrary form of divorce should necessarily lead to a prison term for the offending
husband. A three-year prison term, besides a fine, also raises the issue of proportionality25. The
Opposition raised chiefly three concerns: Whether a civil wrong, mainly a breach of a marriage contract
in an arbitrary manner, ought to be treated as a crime; Whether it is not a contradiction of sorts for the
law to jail a husband for pronouncing instant talaq and also mandate that he pay a subsistence allowance
to the wife; Whether making it a cognizable and non-bailable offence would lead to it being misused
against Muslim men. Further, some see an internal contradiction in the way the law is sought to be
framed. On the one hand it says instant triple talaq in any form is void, thereby declaring that the
marriage continues to subsist; but it also talks of issues such as the custody of children and maintenance,
which would arise only after a divorce. These are valid concerns and cannot be dismissed by the BJP
as arguments aimed to sabotage the Bill.

25 On triple talaq bill: Re-examine the Bill, The Hindu, JANUARY 08, 2018

32 | P a g e
 5. RECENT NEWS RELATED TO THE BILL

Women groups meet law minister, seek standing committee for triple
talaq bill26

Feb 9 Protesting against the “hastily drafted” triple talaq bill, women’s organisations on Thursday met
Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad and demanded that the bill be referred to a Standing
Committee for wider consultations.The organisations which met the law minister said that the bill,
cognizable and non bailable in nature, allows anyone to file a complaint against the husband, unlike the
bigamy laws where only the wife can be the complainant.A delegation, representing the All India
Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) and several independent activists, presented its
memorandum to Prasad stating that Bill of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act,
2017, is unnecessary since the Supreme Court has already declared talaq-e-biddat (triple talaq) invalid
in the Shayara Bano case.

AIMPLB says triple talaq bill is against Constitution and fundamental

rights, vows to remove 'flaws'27

Feb 9 Hitting out at the triple talaq bill proposed by the BJP-led NDA government for its
"flaws", the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on Thursday vowed to work
towards removing them.Describing the "flaws" in the bill as being against the Constitution and
fundamental rights, AIMPLB spokesperson Maulana Syed Khaleel-ur-Rahman Sajjad Nomani
alleged that the proposed bill bans the institution of talaq itself."It is generally publicised that
this bill is presented to stop triple talaq. But, the fact is, if you read the bill, it is to ban the
entire institution of talaq," Nomani told reporters in Hyderabad on the eve of the board's three-
day 26th plenary session."The flaws in it, because of them, it (the bill) is against the
Constitution of India, judgements of the Supreme Court, women and children rights and
fundamental rights. Those flaws be removed," he said.The AIMPLB also claimed efforts are
being made to enact a "very wrong law".File image of AIMPLB leaders. The spokesperson,
however, said the "board was not opposed to the bill, but wanted the flaws removed".The board
requested all the opposition parties to consider whether the bill can be passed in its present

26
Indian Express, February 9, 2018
27
Firstpost.com, February 9, 2018

33 | P a g e
 form, he said.The triple talaq bill has already been passed in the Lok Sabha, but it is yet to get
a nod in the Rajya Sabha, where the BJP-led NDA lacks majority.The Muslim Women
(Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, criminalises instant talaq and provides for up to
three years of imprisonment for accused Muslim men.The bill also enables any person from
anywhere to complain against a Muslim man vis-a-vis divorce, he claimed."Even if the wife
says he (her husband) has not given divorce and that it was a wrong report (on the matter),
police will say you have to prove that in court and that we have to arrest. This is a strange
legislation. That means, the truth is, it makes us feel ashamed not just as a Muslim but as a
citizen of this country," Nomani said.He said an effort was being made to make a "very wrong"
type of law."I challenge categorically there is no such law in the whole world. This is very
shameful type of drafting. An effort was being made to make a very wrong type of law. There
are other such flaws. The Muslim Personal Law Board's stand is to get those flaws removed,"
Nomani said.The board would exercise all the democratic options regarding the bill, he
said.The board sought an appointment with the prime minister after the bill came into public
domain, but no response was received from the PMO, Nomani alleged.The Babri Masjid-Ram
Janmabhoomi dispute, pending before the Supreme Court, would also be discussed in the
meetings, he said.Replying to a query on 'nikahnama' (marriage contract), he said that the issue
would be taken up if any member raises it with the permission of the Chair.To a query on the
Ayodhya issue, he said no proposal has been received officially or unofficially by the
AIMPLB.The spokesperson said it was contempt of court to talk about the outcome of the
Ayodhya issue as it is sub-judice.

AIMPLB against triple talaq bill, moots action against member over
suggestion to shift Babri28

Feb 10 The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on Saturday reiterated its opposition
to the ‘Centre’s attempts to interfere in the personal law matters of the Muslims’ by making a legislation
on triple talaq.AIMPLB general secretary Moulana Wali Rehmani, in his report at the 26th plenary of
the board, expressed concern over the threat to the personal law with the instant triple talaq legislation
being enacted by the Central government. “It is against the fundamental rights guaranteed in the Indian
Constitution and also against the previous court verdicts,” he said.Appreciating the stand taken by the

28
Hindustan Times, Srinivasa Rao Apparasu , February 10, 2018

34 | P a g e
 Opposition parties in Rajya Sabha, where the bill has stalled, Rehmani requested the personal law board
to suggest and guide the Muslims in this regard. He also asked the plenary to evolve a strategy to stop
the Centre from passing the bill.The Board took serious note of the suggestion made by Moulana
Sayyed Salman Hussaini Nadvi, one of the executive committee members, that the Babri Masjid be
shifted from the existing disputed site in Ayodhya to another place, where another magnificent mosque
and a university could be built.While Moulani Nadvi skipped the plenary meeting on the second day,
the Board constituted a four-member committee with senior clerics to look into his comments and
suggest a disciplinary action against him.Referring to the controversy, Rehamni, without naming
anybody, said misleading rumours were being circulated by some elements to misguide the Muslims
on Babri Masjid issue with regard to out of the court settlement. He reiterated that the stand taken by
the Board in the past that a mosque would always be a mosque. “That does not mean we are not against
negotiations, but they should be based on fair justice and equal honour,” he said.Rehmani explained in
detail the legal battle being waged by the Board on the contentious Babri Masjid issue in the Supreme
Court. He said the court had expressed view that the case was related to the title of the land and did not
relate to the matter of faith or belief. He said the related documents had already been submitted to the
court and some other documents which were yet to be translated would be submitted as per the court
directions.Declaring the Hyderabad plenary as historic, he said that it was being held at a very crucial
juncture when the Muslim community was confronting with many issues with the government of the
day adopting a bias attitude.On the issue of social reforms, Rehmani said a lot of awareness was being
created among the Muslims with a movement called “Tahaffuz-e-shariyat-wo-Ishalahai-Mashhira”
(Protection of Shariya Law, Understanding Shariya law and social reforms).Moulana Syed Mohd
Rabey Hasani Nadvi, President AIMPLB, presided over the plenary session, which was attended by
over 500 delegates.

Criminalisation of instant triple talaq is anti-women: AIMPLB29

Feb 12 Reiterating its resolve to fight for the reconstruction of Babri Masjid at the disputed site,
the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) said that every Muslim household should
contribute for construction of the Masjid.Reacting to a question on the funding for reconstructing
of the Masjid, AIMPLB member and Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi said, “Funding the masjid
is a concern of every Muslim in the country,’’ hinting that every Muslim household should
contribute. Asaduddin Owaisi along with other members of the AIMPLB were addressing the media
on the concluding day of the 26th plenary of the Board in Hyderabad on Sunday.Elaborating the

29
Newindianexpress.com, Feb 12, 2018

35 | P a g e
 declaration on the second agenda for discussion on triple talaq, AIMPLB secretary Zafaryab Jeelani
said, “The triple talaq Bill criminalising the practice of instant triple talaq moved by
Central government is anti-women. It will create more difficulties for women. Moreover, it is
against sharia and the Constitution.” Asked about introduction of model nikhanama to obligat e the
groom to vow against instant triple talaq at the time of marriage, the Board said they will assert for
it, however, no clarity was provided on how it will be made into a rule. Asma Zehra, the only woman
member from the board who addressed the media reiterated that the Bill if made a law, will be
harmful for Muslim women.“The Board admires the Opposition’s stand to stall the Triple Talaq Bill
in Rajya Sabha. We will start a countrywide debate against the Bill and hold meetings on women
empowerment across the nation,” said Jeelani, adding that from now on the Board will focus on
social reform movements in the religious community. “AIMPLB fully supports the reform
movement launched by the Board and also decided that statewide and district-level will be formed
under the aegis of the Central body.The Muslims will not accept any amendments or any proposals
for amendments in the sharia. Moreover, we will ensure that every step is taken to protect
the sanctity of marriage and to see to it that the rights of Muslim divorcee women are taken care of
by the families,” maintained the Board. It was announced that the Board will create awareness
among Muslims on how the government in the garb of triple talaq Bill wants to put restrictions on
Muslims.

Dealing with a Rajya Sabha roadblock30

Feb 13

One of the drawbacks of a bicameral parliament in a federal state like India is that victory in a
parliamentary election to the Lower House does not necessarily and instantly translate into requisite
parliamentary strength to legislate and fulfil the promises made to the people. That is because
barring the Congress during the one-party rule era, no government which has come to power at the
Centre, has enjoyed instant majority in the Upper House. PM Narendra Modi too has had to cope
with this harsh reality, which has led to a legislative logjam in the Upper House.Modi has more than
once referred to the manner in which the Opposition in the Upper House has stymied his
government’s legislative agenda. Last week while addressing a rally in Bengaluru, he spoke of how
the Opposition had blocked the Triple Talaq Bill and the bill to grant constitutional status to the
Other Backward Classes (OBC) Commission. The OBC Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha in April

30
Newindianexpress.com, Feb 13, 2018

36 | P a g e
2017 and the Triple Talaq Bill in December last year. Both hit a roadblock in the Upper
House.Several prime ministers have had to deal with this problem when they realise that while they
have the majority in the Lok Sabha, their adversaries command a majority in the Rajya Sabha. Then
begins the arduous task of winning key state elections and improving the ruling party or coalition’s
numbers in the Upper House via biennial elections to that House. Many ruling parties or coalitions
achieve some success in this regard in two rounds of biennial polls but before the issue is clinched,
it’s time for the next Lok Sabha polls. They need to win that election too and also do well in state
Assembly polls if they are to attain a majority in both the Houses. For most prime ministers, it
becomes futile like the Sisyphean effort to push a boulder up a mountain. Every time Sisyphus got
to the top, the boulder tumbled down.Ever since the two Houses were constituted in 1952, the
governments run by the Congress have enjoyed clear majority in the Rajya Sabha for most part of
their tenures. Three prime ministers—Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi—have
commanded a majority in the Rajya Sabha for much of their years in office. Nehru enjoyed a
majority throughout his tenure; Indira and Rajiv had a majority for much of their time in office.
Another prime minister who had the requisite numbers in the Upper House was Lal Bahadur Shastri,
who succeeded Nehru. He inherited the 166 MPs the party had in this House during Nehru’s
death.On the other hand, governments formed by other prime ministers or political parties and
coalitions have not been so lucky. P V Narasimha Rao was unique because he not only had a
minority in the Rajya Sabha, where his party’s strength hovered between 85 and 99, but he also had
a minority (232 MPs) in the Lok Sabha—yet, he dismantled the pseudo-socialist policies of the
Nehru-Gandhis and laid the foundation for India to emerge as an economic superpower. Atal Bihari
Vajpayee was prime minister for six years, but the strength of the BJP never rose beyond 50 in the
Rajya Sabha during his tenure. Most significantly, after 1989, no prime minister has commanded a
majority in the Rajya Sabha for almost 30 years. We need to take stock of this reality when a prime
minister talks of how his legislative plans are stifled by the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha.This year
will see biennial elections to the Rajya Sabha when one-third of the House will retire in a few
months. The BJP now has 58 members in this House. With some of its allies in the National
Democratic Alliance, it can claim a strength of around 80 in the 245-member House. When Modi
became the prime minister, the NDA had 57 MPs in this House. The NDA’s numbers are expected
to rise after this round, but it may still fall short of a majority (123).The Modi government’s woes
began in 2014 itself when key economic reform measures were stalled during the Winter Session
of 2014 in the Rajya Sabha. They were the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Bill and the Insurance
Laws (Amendment) Bill. In April, 2017, the Rajya Sabha blocked the Bill which sought to provide
constitutional status to a commission for socially and educationally backward classes. Last month,

37 | P a g e
 the OBC bill came back to the Lok Sabha after the Rajya Sabha considered the same and made
several amendments. The government tabled the Bill once again in the Lower House and said it
wanted the House to negate the amendments made by the Rajya Sabha. So, currently, a political
football is on over this bill. The Triple Talaq Bill was cleared by the Lok Sabha on 28 December
2017. When it came before the Rajya Sabha, the Congress raised all kinds of objections and wanted
it sent to a select committee. The long and short of it is that two important legislative measures are
stalled because the government of the day does not have a majority in the Upper House.When the
Constituent Assembly examined this issue, there was overwhelming support for a second chamber.
However, the Constitution-makers provided for some contingencies. For example, it was laid down
that while both Houses enjoyed equal rights, the Lok Sabha’s opinion would prevail in regard to
money bills.Given the problems faced by successive governments in seeing through their legislative
measures in the Rajya Sabha, one wonders whether N Gopalaswami Ayyangar, who was a strong
votary of the second chamber, failed to foresee what India’s oldest party would do seven decades
hence, when he said that they had taken care to ensure that the Rajya Sabha would not prove a clog
either to legislation or administration. But this is exactly the problem that Prime Minister Modi is
facing today

AIMPLB to continue efforts to stop triple talaq bill31

Feb 12 The All India Muslim Personal Law Board, the apex body of Indian Muslims, on Sunday
vowed to continue its efforts to stop passage of the triple talaq bill by Parliament. It also indicated that
if the bill, in its present form, is passed by Rajya Sabha after being passed by the Lok Sabha, they will
challenge it in the Supreme Court. The indication came after the board’s 26th plenary, which concluded
here on Sunday. The three-day plenary of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), the apex
body of Indian Muslims, began here on Friday evening with the meeting of its executive.AIMPLB
General Secretary Moulana Syed Wali Rahmani presented his report on the action taken on the
decisions of the previous plenary.(Photo: Zabi) The three-day plenary of All India Muslim Personal
Law Board (AIMPLB), the apex body of Indian Muslims, began here on Friday evening with the
meeting of its executive.AIMPLB General Secretary Moulana Syed Wali Rahmani presented his report
on the action taken on the decisions of the previous plenary.

Triple talaq bill a conspiracy against Muslim women: Personal Law Board32

31
Nyoooz.com, Siyasat, Feb 12, 2018
32
Hindustan Times, Feb27, 2018

38 | P a g e
 Feb 27Calling it “anti-Sharia and anti-women”, the women’s wing of the All India Muslim Personal
Law Board will take out a silent march in Jaipur on Wednesday to oppose the triple talaq bill.The
march, in which around 3 lakh women are expected to take part, will start from Char
Darwaza.Addressing a press conference here, Dr Asma Zohara, convenor of the women’s wing of
AIMPLB, said, “The board wants the government to take back the bill as Muslim women are happy
with Sharia law.”The bill , she said, has a fundamental flaw. While section 2 of the bill states that instant
triple talaq is unconstitutional, section 3 says that if a husband gives triple talaq, he will be jailed. “If
triple talaq is not valid, then how can you punish someone for it?” she asked.“The bill is being presented
as a historic one that will empower women. How is it empowerment if homes are destroyed and women
are left to beg on the streets?” Zohara asked.“We carried out a signature campaign against the bill and
got 5 crore signatures, of which 2.8 crore were of Muslim women. They said they are satisfied with
personal laws and don’t want any interference.”The board has been opposing the triple talaq bill, saying
the government has no right to interfere in the Muslim personal law. In August last year, the Supreme
Court had declared instant triple talaq unconstitutional.Fathima Muzaffer, an AIMPLB member, said
the Quran gave Muslim women rights 1,400 years ago. “We were emancipated 1,400 years back.
Muslim women were given property rights and other rights as a wife, daughter and mother.”She said
the government was in a hurry to get the bill, pending in the Rajya Sabha, passed. “No Muslim religious
bodies were consulted and it was passed without any debate in the Lok Sabha.”Yasmin Farooqui,
member of the board, said the bill seemed to be a conspiracy against the Muslims. “The Constitution
clearly states that no one can interfere in anyone’s religion. Despite that our religion is being meddled
with. This seems to be the first step towards changing the Constitution seeing that the Muslims are a
minority,” she said.Farooqui said when lakhs of Muslim women were opposing the bill, why was the
government pushing it at the instance of a few Muslim women. “It seems pre-planned,” she said citing
the example of Ishrat Jahan, one of the petitioners in the triple talaq case, who had joined the BJP.The
triple talaq bill has been hotly contested, with the Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan carrying out a
campaign in favour of the bill while the AIMPLB and several Muslim activists have criticised it.

Salman Khurshid: Criminalising Triple Talaq Is Unlawful33

March 11 It was in May last year, when the media reported that the Supreme Court had appointed
senior advocate Salman Khurshid to assist as amicus curiae before the bench hearing petitions against
triple talaq and how it violated the rights of Muslim women. In his recently released book, titled Triple

33
Midday.com, March 11, 2018

39 | P a g e
Talaq: Examining Faith (Oxford University Press), Khurshid, who was former Minister of External
Affairs under the Congress regime, clarifies that this wasn't true. "I had taken it upon myself to intervene
in the matter, in person," writes Khurshid, adding that he had actually wanted to offer an amicus brief,
without supporting any side. "I attempted to explain the situation several times to the press, but it
seemed most were little concerned with the difference. My only aim was to assist the Court in reaching
the truth."The book is no different. Khurshid, while refusing to make his stand clear, provides a
comprehensive overview on the contentious issue, which stirred many a debate last year. He also dives
deep into other aspects of this practice - why triple talaq is problematic, why it has thrived, what the
Quran and Muslim religious leaders say about it, and the reasons behind the court's decision. "Not
everything one says is finally included in the judgment and not every one reads judgments closely...
Someone had to put things into perspective beyond the wild propaganda. There is nothing worse for a
plural society than demonisation of a community or its norms," explains Khurshid of why he wrote the
book, in an email interview.In the book, Khurshid also highlights how there's a general misconception
about divorce under the Muslim Personal Law. He mentions how he was once chosen to speak about
triple talaq at a university, where a "feisty, young lawyer, who came prepared for a lively debate"
inevitably questioned the unilateral right of the husband to give talaq. "I carefully explained that there
are several other methods that gave the right to the wife as well, except that it required an intervention
of a qazi or judge," he says. Here, he points out to the most prescribed modes of talaq - talaq-ul-sunnat,
ila, zihar and talaq-ul-bidat. It's within talaq-ul-bidat that a husband pronounces talaq thrice, while a
woman is entitled to ask for judicial divorce under zihar."The very fact that we needed five judges of
the Supreme Court to decide the matter shows how much confusion there is. And then the judges could
not agree entirely amongst themselves. After the judgment the government continues to misconstrue or
deliberately misunderstands the judgment and triple talaq declared non est," he adds, citing how Justice
Rohinton Fali Nariman, who was part of the bench that struck down triple talaq, called Islamic law of
marriage and divorce 'astonishingly modern'. "But, then one has to see how 1,400 years ago Islam
provided what has just recently been made part of the common law," says Khurshid.Having said that,
the former Union minister says that he has no issue with courts, particularly the constitutional courts
intervening, in cases concerning Muslim law "because our constitutional scheme recognises that right
and need". "But it is important that judges are adequately equipped to deal with Personal Law as indeed
any specialist area of common law. There is, perhaps a greater need for briefs from knowledgeable
persons," he says, explaining again why he chose to intervene.Khurshid also doesn't understand the
merit of the bill criminalising triple talaq. Clause 4 of the bill, officially called Muslim Women
(Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill 2017, states that pronouncement of triple talaq, shall be
punished for a term which may extend up to three years and fine. "It is a futile and unlawful exercise

40 | P a g e
 with no real benefit to women," argues Khurshid. "If the government is serious about welfare of women
it should legislate to assist deserted and divorced women unable to make two ends meet." The bill,
which was cleared by the Lok Sabha in December last year, is still awaiting a green signal from the
Rajya Sabha. "I sincerely hope good sense prevails and that we do not succumb to the pressure tactics
being used by the government. Women and men want to see reform of the manner in which the law
operates and correct the distortions that have crept in.

"Muslim women to protect Shariah laws34

March 12 A talk-cum-interactive session on Shariah Laws Awareness and Issue of Triple

Talaq Bill with respect to women in Islam was held by Dr Asma Zehra, a renowned social
worker and executive member of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) at Ahbab
Community Hall, near Jafar Nagar, on Sunday.
In order to stand against the interference of personal laws, AIMPLB has decided to stage a
women’s rally at 2pm on March 20 in which around 15,000 women from the city are expected
to participate. The rally will start from Kasturchand Park and move towards RBI Square.

“Thousand of women dressed in burqa would symbolize the unity among the people of our
community. The rally would be peaceful, non-violent and disciplined with no slogan-shouting.
It will be a silent message against the controversial Bill on triple talaq now in the Rajya Sabha,”
said Zehra.
The Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Marriage Bill proposed a three-year jail term for
a Muslim man who divorces his wife via talaq-e-biddat (instant triple talaq). The Bill has been
passed by Lok Sabha. But it is yet to be passed by the Rajya Sabha to become a law. The
Supreme Court has set aside instant triple talaq or talaq-e-biddat as a “manifestly arbitrary”
practice.This initiative is being carried out across the country to awaken crores of Muslims and
bring them closer to their faith so that they raise their voice to protect the Shariah, she
said.Zehra charged up the atmosphere as she explained how the concept of ‘talaq’ (divorce) is
actually a boon to women. She said, “Islam permits dissolution of marriage and unlike other
religions, it does not believe that the relationship between husband and wife will stretch beyond
one lifetime up to seven lives. It is a simple contract where the husband agrees to take care of

34
The Times of India, March 12, 2018

41 | P a g e
 the woman and treat her well. If not, both parties can part ways and can legally marry someone
else. The women need not suffer the pain in an unsuccessful marriage.”
Taking potshots at the people demanding changes to Shariah, she said, “Everyone is free to
practice own religion and it cannot be forced. If some people are not willing to abide by the
Shariah, then they can use their fundamental right as per the Constitution of India, but they
cannot demand modifications”.

Muslim Women Board Seeks Amendment in Triple Talaq Bill, Writes to PM

Narendra Modi35

March 12 The All India Muslim Women's Personal Law Board (AIMWPLB) President Shaista
Amber has written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi seeking amendment in the Muslim Women
(Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, popularly known as the Triple Talaq bill.Amber said that
she "urged him to do changes to present bill as it will lead to conflict and disunity in family instead of
resolution.""We support the bill but there should be amendment to it," she added.The bill, if enacted,
will make triple talaq a criminal offence. It proposes a three-year jail term for a Muslim man who
divorces his wife in any form of spoken, written or by electronic means such as email, SMS, and
WhatsApp.

Triple Talaq Bill will not be accepted: AIMPLB Women Wing36

March 18 With the demands for withdraw of 'Triple Talaq Bill' from the Rajya Sabha on an
upswing, the women wing of All India Muslim Personal Law Board said the Bill on Triple Talaq
was not acceptable. Hundreds of women and Muslim clerics gathered here at Tile Wali Mosque
premises and raised voice against the Triple Talaq Bill, terming it against Shariyat, though
AIMPLB President Shaishta Amber alleged that women were misguided and talaq should not be
given on the social media.Ms Amber said awareness should be spread about triple talaq. She said
that atrocities on Muslim women increases, when their husband utter talaq at once and some
Maulanas never want to make it legal, to punish those, who do not follow the rules for
talaq.AIMPLB Women Wing Convenor Asma Jahra said the Bill was against the Muslim women
and the Constitution. She alleged that it was interruption in Shariyat and will not be accepted.

35
Indian Express, March 12, 2018
36
Webindia123.com, March 18, 2018

42 | P a g e
 ''The Constitution provides freedom to follow any religion and the government cannot interfere
in our religious issues,'' the AIMPLB Convenor added.She alleged that the Muslim Women
Protection and the Rights in Marriage Act 2017 was passed in the Lok Sabha to gain political
benefits, adding that AIMPLB or any other Muslim organisation was not consulted before
drafting the Bill.

Chandrababu: Triple Talaq Bill shows grudge against Muslims37

March 20 Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu on Monday addressed a group of Muslim

leaders in Hyderabad wherein he stated that the Triple Talaq Bill showed 'grudge against
Muslims'.The Muslim leaders called on him to show their solidarity in his fight with the BJP-
led NDA government.Claiming that TDP is the first to take a stand against triple talaq bill
tabled in the Parliament, Chandrababu termed the bill as a measured attempt of bias against
Muslims adding that it is not correct as the family and children will suffer if the husband is
arrested and jailed.He sought the support of Muslims and all other sections of people in the
fight for the rights of Andhra Pradesh against BJP who is trying to weaken the state. Assuring
the Muslims to protect the four percent reservation enjoyed by the community in education
and government jobs, the Chief Minister went on to clarify TDP exit from the BJP alliance
stating the reason to be the failed promises made to the state.Claiming that he had joined the
BJP-led NDA for the state’s interests, the TDP leader said they won’t rest till achieving the
goal of special category status.‘After talaq goes, uniform civil code may be in’Nagpur:
Continuing its series of protests against the bill banning triple talaq, All India Muslim Personal
Law Board (AIMPLB) rallied together over 25,000 women at Nagpur. Dressed in the full hijab
(veil), women carrying placards reading ‘We are safe in Sharia law’ blocked the road from
Kasturchand Park till Zero Mile.
The speakers, an all women panel, exhorted the audience to rise against any ‘conspiracy to
impose uniform civil code’. Banning triple talaq was termed as the first step towards bringing
in an uniform civil code. Threats were issued that the ruling party may have to bear the
consequences of hurting Muslim sentiments. Banning triple talaq was dubbed as a means to
curb women’s freedom. Concern was also expressed about ‘attempts to remove special status

37
The Time of India, March 20, 2018

43 | P a g e
of J&K’. One speaker even warned that the government might even ban polygamy in future.

A majority of the women who were part of the rally preferred not to speak or comment, while
a few gave a terse answer that they cannot tolerate any interference in religious matters.

Before Nagpur, a similar rally was held at Malegaon.

Monisha Bushra, executive member of AIPMLB, said, “BJP government is bent upon
implementing its agenda of building Ram Temple, doing away with special status of Jammu
and Kashmir (J&K), and introducing uniform civil code.” Once Article 370, which grants
special status is removed, J&K would become like any other state of the country, she stressed.

“Muslims ruled the country for a thousand years. That was the time when Islamic law governed
the country. After the British came, the law was limited to governing our personal affairs,
through the Sharia Application Act of 1937. Now, the government wants interfere in our
personal laws in the name of bringing gender equality. It’s unwarranted as Islam ensures the
highest degree of priority to women,” Bushra said.

Coming down on Prime Minister Narendra Modi, she said, “His concern towards Muslim
women is a farce. How can we forget the 2002 riots, when our women were raped and
murdered. Had there been an arrangement like triple talaq for Modi, then even he may not have
simply abandoned his wife. Rather she could have got a divorce to start life afresh,” she said.
She claimed that only 2,000 odd Muslim women have been divorced as against 24 lakh Hindu
women abandoned by their husbands.
The speakers cited the Islamic law to stress how triple talaq benefited women rather than
hampering their interests. There is a system of khula, which allows even the woman to
terminate a marriage from her side, said the speakers. Bushra said once the uniform civil code
is put in place, women will have to wait for years to get a court verdict for a divorce.
Arjumand Bano of Ahle Sunnat Jamat, a prominent sect, said Muslim women are bound by no
other law but the Sharia.
“Divorce is not preferred in the Islamic law, but it’s allowed as a means to end a troubled

44 | P a g e
 marriage. Once a divorce takes place, it cannot be reversed. If a divorcee woman goes back to
her husband, it’s adultery. There are some who want to legitimize such marriages through
court,” she said referring to Ishrat Jahan, who filed the petition against triple talaq.

Muslim women rally against Triple Talaq Bill in Rajasthan's Fatehpur38

27 March Thousands of Muslim women took out a protest rally in Rajasthan's Fatehpur against the
Triple Talaq Bill today. The protestors demanded the government should take back the Triple Talaq
Bill and should not interfere in religious law in any way."The Constitution has given us complete right
that every religion has the right to follow its law. So, why are we being broken by bringing changes in
our law? If this country wants us to progress, then this bill should be withdrawn. If this law is forced
upon us, we will not stay alive. That is why we request the Prime Minister and the President that this
bill is withdrawn," one of the protesting women said. The protestors took out a rally in an area two
kilometres from Fatehpur area of Rajasthan's Sikar district.The protestors carried placards and flags in
their hands. A memorandum for the Prime Minister was also handed over to the SDM by representatives
of protesting women.The protestors, which also included the city cleric, claimed that the Triple Talaq
Bill was against Muslim women and children.

Bhatkal: Hundreds of women turn out to protest against Triple Talaq Bill39

March 21

Majlis-e-Islah wa Tanzeem on Wednesday led a protest by local women against the Muslim
Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act 2017 saying the ball was passed in haste in the
Lok Sabha.A number of women turned out for the protest with different placards into their
hands against the triple-talaq bill, demonstrating the solidarity of the Muslim women on the
issue, and submitted a memorandum to the President of India through the Assistant
Commissioner. The memorandum also condemned the approach of the present government
and mentioned that they are ‘deeply hurt’ by the statement of the Hon’ble President in his
recent joint parliamentary where he said “Muslim women were captured to political cause”
and this bill will “emancipate” them and give a life of Honour and dignity”, saying such
remarks are direct insult and attack to the largest minority community of the country.The

38
India Today, Dev Ankur Wadhawan, March 27, 2018
39
Bhatkal news, March 21, 2018

45 | P a g e
 memorandum further stated that the bill is anti-social as the civil contract is penalized
converting civil matter into criminal offence.It also stated “ We reject this bill and appeal to
take back this bill as it is against the Constitution of India and against Women’s Rights and
Gender Justice.The memorandum put forth two demands to the president of IndiaTo delete the
para on the Muslim Women from his aforeside address to the Parliament.To advise the
government not to hurt the sentiments of the second largest community.Several organizations
of women have been protesting against the Triple Talaq bill across the country and it has just
intensified after the president’s Joint Parliamentary speech remarks. The women across the
country have disapproved the interference of the government into the Muslim Personal Law,
citing the clauses of the Constitution of India giving them the freedom to practice the Shariah
Law. They have also played down the argument of the Government (i.e The women
community was out-powered by the opposite gender in the Islamic Shariah Law) saying the
rights of the women in Islam can be matched to no other religion or community in the world.

Barsoi: Women take to street against Triple talaq bill40

March 22 Muslim women took to streets in Barsoi sub-divisional headquarters against triple talaq bill
while registering vehement protest against the bill. Muslim women took out a silent procession and
expressed faith in Muslim Personal Law.Earlier a meeting was held at PWD ground. The speakers
strongly slammed central government for the bill. Later women holding placards in the form of rally
reached Sub-divisional office. A letter addressing president was handed over to SDO. The programme
was organised under the flagship of Tahaffuz Shariat Committee. Men were not allowed in the
meeting.Kaneez Fatima who presided over the meeting said Muslim women satisfied with the Muslim
Personal Law and they will not tolerate any kind of interference in it. She said central government with
the help of the Bill is targeting a particular committee. This is a planned conspiracy to disintegrate their
family system. It is a nefarious conspiracy which will not be allowed to be implemented. Shaheen Talat
said if the government is sincere for welfare and development of women, then why only Muslim
women, there are more than 24 lakh non-Muslim sisters in the society who are abandoned without talaq.
One of them is the wife of our Prime Minister Narendra Modi Jashodaben Ben.Majida Khatoon said
the bill is a sheer violation of section 14 and 15 of Indian Constitution. Darakhshan Parveen said the

40
Siasat.com, March 22, 2018

46 | P a g e
 bill is against the interest of Muslim children and women. The speakers demanded the withdrawal of
the bill.

Muslim women silenced Aurangabad with Triple Talaq Bill protest41

March 24 Thousands of Muslim women stepped out of their houses here on Friday protesting
against the Triple Talaq Bill and interference of Government in the Sharia law. As per the order
issued by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), the rally begin from Aakhmas
Maidan and end at Divisional Commissioner’s office in a disciplined manner. Holding
placards, well qualified women including teachers, doctors and lawyers were among those who
participated in the silent rally said they don’t want any change in Sharia Organising committee
convenor said , the Act was against the provision of right of freedom of expression and religion
enshrined in the Indian Constitution and blamed the central government for polarisation of the
Muslim community. The protestors also submitted a memorandum to the Divisional
Commissioner.Muslim women march against instant talaq bill42March
25BEGUSARAI: Demanding revocation of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on
Marriage) Bill, 2017, hundreds of women took part in a silent procession march, a call for
which was given by the women wing of the Tahaffuz-e-Shariat Committee, in Begusarai on
Saturday.
Led by zila parishad member Sultana Begum and Balia subdivision co-ordinator
Haidri Noorie, women held placards and called the bill “an infringement on their fundamental
rights”.
“The Constitution guarantees the freedom to profess, practise and propagate one’s own
religion. Since this freedom is given to every individual, the government should not interfere
in the belief and religion of any citizen. The government cannot force Muslims to follow other
communities in issues related to personal laws as it would amount to an infringement on their
fundamental rights,” Noorie told reporters.
Traffic movement on most of the roads remained affected for over two hours due to the march

41
Siasat, March 24, 2018
42
The Times of India, March 25, 2018

47 | P a g e
 that ended after a memorandum addressed to President Ram Nath Kovind and Prime
Minister Narendra Modi was submitted at the office of the Begusarai district magistrate.

Muslim women protest bill to ban triple talaq, march in Lucknow43

March 19 Even as a section of Muslim women in India is vying hard against the practice of triple
talaq, a large number of women took to the streets in Uttar Pradesh's Lucknow city to stage a silent
protest against the bill.

The Triple Talaq Bill aims to criminalize the act of Muslim men divorcing their wives by merely
uttering the word "talaq" thrice. The bill, which was passed by Lok Sabha on December 28, 2017,
was introduced in Rajya Sabha in January. However, it has failed to reach a conclusion in the Upper
House.Meanwhile, Muslim women in several states of India have been participating in rallies to scrap
the Bill.A large number of Muslim women from Lucknow and adjoining cities gathered at Teele Wali
Masjid Sunday and requested the Narendra Modi government to reconsider the bill.The protest was
organized by the women wing of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB). Eminent female
members of the organization like Nighat Parveen from Lucknow, Dr. Asma Zehra from Hyderabad
and Mamdooha Majid from New Delhi led the rally, The Times of India reported.The protesters held
placards which branded triple talaq as anti-social, anti-children, anti-women and unconstitutional.
The placards read "We demand take back Triple Talaq Bill", "Triple Talaq Bill suppresses women"
and "Honorable President Sharia doesn't enslave or chain Muslim women. Take back your
statement". Here's what the protesters have to say: The participants of the rally said that the Triple
Talaq Bill interferes with their Sharia law. "We demand the bill goes since Muslim women are
satisfied in personal laws allowed to them under the constitution. The government is not bringing the
bill in any sympathy for the Muslims but only as an interference in Shariah, which we will not
accept," Dr. Zehra was quoted as saying by TOI.Zehra also added that when the bill was introduced
in the Lok Sabha, it was passed without consulting the AIMPLB or the other Muslim women's
organizations.The convener of the protest in Lucknow also echoed Zehra's views. "The government
says the bill is for Muslim women's emancipation, but we have been empowered for 1400 years now.
Muslim women have the right to choice in marriage, in ancestral property, in divorce and to re-marry,
unlike other communities," said Parveen.

43
IB Times, March 19, 2018

48 | P a g e
 Muslim Women Take Out Rally Against Triple Talaq Bill in Maharashtra's
Bhusawal44

27 March

Hundreds of women from Muslim community today took out a rally in Bhusawal in Maharashtra's
Jalgaon district to protest a Central bill that criminalises the practice of talaq-e-biddat or instant
divorce.Representatives of the women handed over a memorandum to Sub-Divisional Magistrate
stating that they don't want government's interference in the Shariya or Muslim law. They claimed the
government introduced the bill in a hurried manner without discussing it with community
representatives.The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017 was passed by the
Lok Sabha in the winter session, but could not be passed in the Rajya Sabha with the opposition
demanding that it be sent to a Select Committee for a detailed scrutiny.The draft law prescribes a jail
term of three years for a Muslim man who divorces his wife through talaq-e-biddat--uttering the word
divorce three times in quick succession.

PM Modi pushes for Triple Talaq bill in farewell speech to RS members45

28 March Addressing the retiring members of Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Narendra Modi on
Wednesday said it would have been good had the MPs been part of upcoming historic Triple Talaq
bill.Blaming the continued disruptions in the upper house of Parliament, Modi said: “Unfortunately,
the retiring members will not be part of Parliament when the decision on instant triple talaq is
taken.”The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, popularly known as the Triple
Talaq Bill, was passed in the Lok Sabha but is yet to get the nod in the Upper House.He said the
outgoing members must have prepared speeches on important issues so that their contribution is
remembered. But they could not do so.Modi said that the responsibility of smooth functioning lies not
only with the opposition but also with the government.The Rajya Sabha, Modi said, is a distinguished
House with eminent members serving here. He said the House plays a vital role in India’s
democracy.“We bid farewell to some of our MP colleagues in the Rajya Sabha. All of the outgoing
parliamentarians have their significant contribution, importance, and each one of them has tried to
contribute to the best of their capacity for the bright future of this country, and the country will not
forget them,” he said.

44
Business Standard, March 27, 2018
45
The Statesman, March 28, 2018

49 | P a g e
 Relevance of Triple Talaq Bill questioned46

29 March Muslim women are caught in a fix after the Triple Talaq bill 2017 said Prof
Jameelunnisa member of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB). She was speaking
at the special discourse on Triple Talaq bill 2017 organised by Shariah Committee for Women-
Hyderabad here on Wednesday.Dr Asma Zehra, president women's wing AIMPLB, explained,
“There was no need to bring in a bill after the Supreme Court Judgement dated August 22,
2017. There was false propaganda that the Supreme Court had directed to frame a law based
on the directive of two judges.” Asma said, the bill was supposed to help women but it will
only make their lives more difficult. A majority of the community is poor and women are left
stranded without any help after a divorce. There were references that Muslims countries have
banned Triple Talaq which is untrue said a participant. She added, “Under the bill, even a
neighbour can file a complaint. It can be misused. The guardianship and custody of children in
this bill is given to the mother. When she herself is having no one to take care of her, how can
she maintain the children? It is against the Guards & Parents Act. About 500 ladies,
intellectuals, teachers, doctors and professionals attended the seminar.Review:

Misconceptions Over Instant Triple Talaq Persist47

29 March The Supreme Court’s verdict on August 22, 2017, invalidating instant triple divorce
and the resultant furore has prompted Ziya Us Salam to look deeper into the issue. He has looked
into instances of women having undergone sufferings since the 1970s, illustrating with many other
examples, besides going into personal details of the seven women petitioners – how these women
kept their spirit and forbearance intact and went up to the Supreme Court braving tremendous odds,
and examining their sufferings in the light of the Quran, to be read and understood along with the
socio-historical underpinnings.This is unlike the Urdu memoir, Kaarwaan-e-Zindagi, of Maulana
Abul Hasan (Ali Miyan) Nadvi (1914-99). In its third volume, chapter four, the Maulana discusses
in detail as to how the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) in February 1986, under
his stewardship, influenced the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to nullify the Supreme Court
verdict on Shah Bano through legislation. He, however, chooses not to say a word about the un -
Quranic talaq-e-biddat which was first pronounced against Shah Bano (1916-92) inside the Indore

46
The Hans India, March 29, 2018
47
The Wire, Mohammad Sajjad, March 29, 2018

50 | P a g e
court in November 1978, before the judge, only after the judge remarked that even under the
Personal Law, Shah Bano was entitled for a maintenance from her well-to-do advocate husband. It
was this un-Quranic divorce that was invalidated by the Supreme Court. Shah Bano’s sufferings in
her 70s are conspicuously missing from Ali Miyan’s long narrations. So is his unjustifiable silence
on the un-Quranic divorce. Unlike Shah Bano, most of these petitioners are in the prime of their life
and career.Ali Miyan records that he pointed out to Rajiv Gandhi that provincial Waqf Boards
should be entrusted with the task of maintaining the divorced woman if she did not have relatives
to take care of her. But the triumphant Ali Miyan, after 1986, never checked if his proposal was
really workable for Shah Bano, whose victory in the Supreme Court was nullified admittedly
through manipulative tricks by these people. The Maulana is, however, honest in admitting that such
a trick turned out to be counter-productive in the sense that it fuelled majoritarian communal
reaction.Ziya Us Salam seems agonised by the fact that there are several misconceptions over instant
triple talaq not only at the popular level but also among informed segments, resulting in
misinformation and wilful disinformation. This book is an “exercise of clearing the air around the
issue of divorce in Islam…to present a complete picture with the help of the Quran and back it up
with instances from the Hadith and history” (p. Xxiii). Like Shah Bano, the dilemmas and agonies
of most of the petitioners persist. The judgement does not talk of maintenance or alimony. If instant
triple divorce is void, then can a woman re-marry her husband having passed her iddat long back?
Or should she go for khula if she chooses to marry someone else? There are more questions than
answers in their lives. Yet, the AIMPLB refuses to delve into the issues threadbare. Their street
agitations seem to vilify the sufferings of these women rather than criminalise the men who resort
to un-Quranic divorce. Misogyny persists! Brief chapters dealing with specific aspects in this slim
volume are organised in a coherent manner. The book looks into almost every dimension of the
issue – theological, socio-historical aspects, intricacies and nuances – purporting to help common
men and women see through the misconceptions. He has assailed the Urdu (and other vernacular)
media and sections of the Muslim intelligentsia, including legal academics and columnists, who
have not made enough interventions in these spaces. The Urdu media, which has the largest reach
in the communities of theological seminaries, often does not offer space for contending debates on
such issues. According to him, the un-Quranic talaq-e-biddat became acceptable because not
enough interventions have been made to educate the common people. Looking into various court
verdicts, he arrives at the conclusion that “no judgement of the Supreme Court has gone against the
Quran (p. 210).”Selective AmnesiaCiting relevant verses from the Quran, the book dwells upon the
long process of ending a genuinely unhappy marriage, to be preceded by arbitration and
reconciliation efforts. “Nowhere does the Quran refer to instant triple talaq or approve of it even

51 | P a g e
indirectly” (p. 16). The parting has to happen, “on fair terms…the husband does not enjoy an
unbridled right to divorce”. In a certain contingent situation, Caliph Umar made instant triple talaq
valid but the man had to be flogged. Subsequently, Caliph Ali had invalidated instant triple talaq.
These two vital aspects of the issue are generally kept unknown from the common people.
Interestingly, Caliph Umar did penalise instant triple divorce, yet there was a lot of opposition when
the incumbent majoritarian right wing government proposed a Bill to criminalise instant triple
divorce, something the clergy ought to have done at least in 1986, if not earlier.Except the Hanafi,
almost no other sect and sub-sect validates talaq-e-biddat. The author argues that there are some
Hanafi jurists who even invalidate instant triple divorce (p.45), and that “there is no direct word
from Imam Hanifa on triple talaq’ (p. 46). The author argues strongly against halala as there is
absolutely no Quranic sanction for the way it is practised in parts of India. Despite the petitioners’
pleas, the Supreme Court has not delivered its verdict on halala, polygamy, custody of children,
maintenance, etc.Similarly, the author also clears the ignorance and/or misconceptions about khula,
which, he says, is a woman’s ‘inalienable right to divorce’ and ‘the husband cannot refuse consent’
(p. 76).Ziya us Salam talks of talaq-e-tafweez, under which the husband vests in his wife the right
to divorce him. This condition should ideally be written down at the time of marriage in
the nikahnama and can go a long way in bringing down the rate of divorce. Sadly, there is hardly
any nikahnama that is framed in such a manner so as to include this condition of divorce’ (p. 80).
While going for its 26th plenary at Hyderabad in early February 2018, the AIMPLB announced that
the session would prepare a model nikahnama but reneged on it. Faizan Mustafa’s foreword to the
book under review emphasises that the government should make a nikahnama that compulsory
stipulates a complete ban on instant triple divorce (p. Xii).

Patriarchic Hold Over Quranic and Historical Interpretations-In this context, one must recall
Sakina (born 671 AD), daughter of Husain, and great granddaughter of the Prophet. Sakina, in her
marriage contracts, stipulated that she would not obey her husband but would do as she pleased, and
she did not acknowledge that her husband had the right to practice polygyny, says Fatima Mernissi
(1940-2015), in her well-researched book Women and Islam (1990). Also, there are some instances
of such nikahnamas in 17th century India during the Mughal rule. “Around fifteen years ago, the
AIMPLB had promised to draft a model nikahnama. Unfortunately the wait is still on”, complains
Ziya Us Salam. Mernissi, therefore, underlines, “if women’s rights are a problem for some modern
Muslim men, it is neither because of the Koran nor the Prophet, nor the Islamic tradition, but simply
because those rights conflict with the interests of a male elite”.The author says that the AIMPLB
“obfuscates and oscillates” for which he puts greater blame on the politically-affiliated non-clergy

52 | P a g e
 members of the Board, whereas the fact is that the clergy too are politically affiliated and they too
enjoy the privilege of being nominated to legislative houses. He says that only necessary reforms
“will decide whether the AIMPLB becomes an upholder of justice and fair play, or whether it is
reduced to just another NGO using religion to serve its ends. The ball, at the moment, is in the
board’s court. Time is ticking”, he warns (p. 170).The AIMPLB chose to become a respondent and
then pledged in the Supreme Court to start a public movement against instant triple divorce. Instead,
it launched a massive campaign, bringing out women on the streets, against the Bill to criminalise
instant triple divorce. True, there are many flaws and limitations in the proposed Bill, but the board
was not issuing its own draft Bill. They were simply misleading women, instigating them to say
‘No’ to state interference in Personal Laws. Thus, the board was not doing enough to protect the
Quranically-guaranteed interests of women in a patriarchical society, says Ziya Us Salam.
Historically speaking, there is hardly any instance where socio-religious reforms have succeeded
without state support.

Maintenance to the Divorced Women- The volume under review, however, leaves out the issue
of maintenance/alimony. This is too crucial an issue to have been left out. In Surah Baqrah’s verse
236 and 241, much has been ordained for even such a divorced woman who has not been touched
by her husband, and to whom he is not even liable to pay Mahr (roughly translated as dower). The
word Mutah (parting gift) is basically a settlement. Whether it has to be paid as alimony, i.e., regular
maintenance till she dies or remarries or as a share in the wealth and property of the man, is best
left to fair practice, judicial tenability and the mutual agreement of the parties. This slim, lucid
volume is a timely intervention which will hopefully succeed in its objective of clearing many
misconceptions about the issue that has seen wide disjunction between the scriptures and practice.
For this to actualise, the book’s vernacular renderings would be even more helpful.Mohammad
Sajjad is a professor at the Centre of Advanced Study in History, Aligarh Muslim University, and
author of Muslim Politics in Bihar:Changing Contours.

Muslim women protest against Triple Talaq Bill in UP’s Sambhal48

March 29 Hundreds of Muslim women took out a rally against the Triple Talaq Bill, proposed by
the central government.Holding placards and banners, women in their tradition veil gathered on the
streets in Uttar Pradesh’s Sambhal on Wednesday to voice against the imposition of a new law on triple
talaq.The protestors feel that the Union government is interfering in their religious affairs and

48
Siasat, March 29, 2018

53 | P a g e
 demanded to recall the Triple Talaq Bill.The Muslim Women (Protection of Marriage Rights) Bill
2017 has been passed in the Lok Sabha and is pending in the Rajya Sabha.

Triple Talaq Bill intervenes Shariat, ladies hold seminar49

March 29 A seminar was held at KLN Prasad Auditorium, FTAPCCI, Red Hills. It was presided
over by Prof. Jameelunnisa, member of AIMPLB.Muslim women and girl students who attended the
seminar opposed the attitude taken by Govt. of India in passing the Triple Talaq Bill and said that it is
an intervention in the Muslim Personal Law.Dr. Asma Zehra, member of AIMPLB told that Muslims
are against this bill and they will not tolerate any intervention in their personal law. She also said that
this bill has many defects.Dr. Juveria Javeed highlighted various aspects of Triple Talaq with the help
of power point presentation and explained that it is equally applicable to Muslim men and women. She
said that giving three years imprisonment to the husband is unlawful.–Siasat News

Massive protest against triple talaq bill in Degloor50

30 March Women and girls in large numbers peacefully protested in front of division office against
the proposed triple talaq bill to be enforced by the central government. They also submitted a
memorandum to deputy collector Degloor. Earlier a large number of women and girls gathered at
Eidgah Maidan. Women speakers addressed the grand public meeting and asserted that the central
government wants to interfere into the shariah on the pretext of providing rights to Muslim women. By
showing false sympathy it tries to fool Muslim women making them believe that they are oppressed
and subjugated by the shariah.In this scenario, All India Muslim Personal Board decided to show the
so-called saffron sympathizers that Muslim women do not feel subjugated due to Islamic shariah. They
do not want interference in shariah. Braving the heat and sun, women in large numbers attended the
procession and showed that they want to follow shariah and will not tolerate any change in it.Siasat
news

Women's wing of AIMPLB to hold silent protest against triple talaq bill51

April 2 The silent protest was called in by the women wing of All Indian Muslim Personal Law
Board (AIMPLB) and the Muslim women at Azad Maidan were seen carrying placards loudly

49
Siasat, March 29, 2018
50
Siasat, March 30, 2018
51
Business Standard, April 2, 2018

54 | P a g e
 proclaiming their demands with slogans opposing the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on
Marriage) Bill, 2017, and expressing their support to protect the Shariah.Thousands of Muslim women
on Saturday protested at Mumbai's Azad Maidan against the "Triple Talaq" bill being brought out by
the government.Speaking to reporters here, Asma Zahra, head of AIMPLB's women's wing, said the
Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017 was passed in the Lok Sabha in haste
without consulting religious leaders, the ulema, legal experts or womens' groups.The Muslim Personal
Law Board submitted five crore signatures to the Law Commission in favour of the Muslim Personal
Law.Today's protest adopted a few resolutions, she said, and these included opposition to the triple
talaq bill, opposition to any change in the Muslim Personal Law as well as to attempts to bring a
Uniform Civil Code. "This is very rare that so many women from different sects in the community are
assembling to protest this Bill", said former minister and Congress MLA Arif Naseem Khan. "The
protest is also aimed at the handful of women who distributed candies after the government passed the
Bill hurriedly in the Lok Sabha", she said. "Our protest is also to respond to the few women who
distributed candies after the government passed the Bill in haste in the Lok Sabha. The protest is also
aimed at the handful of women who distributed candies after the government passed the Bill hurriedly
in the Lok Sabha"."The central government is exploiting the Muslim women by making a law on
Triple talaq", the protesting women added. Muslim politicians of different parties have supported the
protest.Mumbai:

BMMA recommends amendment while enacting Muslim family law52

April 3 Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan (BMMA) has recommended certain amendments in the
triple talaq bill, which has been passed by Lok Sabha last December and waiting for Rajya Sabha assent.
They want strict punishment for a person or organisation other than the husband who abets triple talaq.
“Also, any person who compels a women to do halala shall be punishable with an imprisonment of
three years and fine,” said the co-founder of BMMA Noorjehan Safia Niaz.BMMA welcomes Supreme
Court judgement on triple talaq but said the issues like nikah halala, polygamy, age of marriage, custody
of children, share of property etc remain unaddressed. “Women’s rights in all these issues are clearly
protected in Quranic injunctions as well as various articles of the constitution. Unfortunately, the
patriarchal dominance by orthodox forces have led to women being denied justice,” said Niaz. She
further added that the orthodox and patriarchal males have dominated the debate on the rights
of Muslim women and have stonewalled the attempts to bring reform in Muslim personal law.

52
Free Press Journal, April 3, 2018

55 | P a g e
 Taking a veiled shot at All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), which recently
galvanised thousands of hijab-clad Muslim women to protest against triple talaq bill, Niaz said
the recent marches indicate that the politicians are instrumentalising women and using them
for their own legal protection.

The Flawed Triple Talaq Bill Will Make 'Things Difficult For Muslim
Women53

April 3 More than 50,000 burqa-clad women gathered at Azad Maidan over the weekend to demand
the withdrawal of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017. These women
were a part of a protest spearheaded by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), with
most of them being members of the body's women's division.As the protest moves to the capital, where
they will hold a massive demonstration on April 4 at Ram Leela Maidan, Dr Asma Zahra, head of the
women's wing of the AIMPLB spoke to mid-day about how the Bill - which is actually meant to 'protect'
them - will backfire and only manage to keep these women, whose husbands don't want to be in a
marriage with them anymore, unhappily married.'Marriage a contract in Islam'
"The concept of marriage in Islam is a contract - it is not the same in Hindu ideology, where a girl child
is believed to be 'paraya dhan' and be with her husband through different lifetimes," said Zahra."Muslim
women are more empowered and have the right to choose their partners. The groom (during the
marriage ceremony) says he will take his wife in marriage, which means that he is responsible for her
maintenance and well-being as long as they remain married. The bride gives her consent for the same
by saying qubool hai i.e. she agrees. Hence, the marriage is a contract between two consenting people,"
she added."If the husband does not want to have the wife in the marriage, then our religion gives us the
right to be empowered and freed from it, which would otherwise cause us unhappiness. Muslim women
are dignified, empowered, and free to re-marry. When the man says 'I divorce you,' whether once or
thrice, he is conveying his intention of nullifying the marriage - he wants to break up. Whether he
conveys his intention via a WhatsApp message or a letter, gradually or instantly, that doesn't matter,"
she said.According to her, the Bill, in all its legality, was 'putting a legal binding on marriage after a
break-up.' "It (the bill) is making things difficult for Muslim women. If we have the freedom to exit
from a marriage, then why should we be trapped in an unsuccessful marriage via this bill?" She asked,
and also cited that the Bill's suggestion of upto three years imprisonment for men who denounced their
wives via triple talaq would do more self-harm than good."Will the girl be forced to live with her in-

53
Midday.com, April 3, 2018

56 | P a g e
 laws while her husband is in jail? What would they do to her? If she cannot live there, then where will
she live? Also, what is the guarantee that the man, after serving a three imprisonment, will continue to
treat her as his wife?" She added, "Even the name of the Bill is misleading (it is called 'protection of
rights on marriage); it is not protecting Muslim women at all, and is not considered a win for them."'It
is a flawed Bill'
"This is a democratic country and we have a right to voice our opinion. Even though we do not have
political representation, we have the numbers and expect a positive reaction from Rajya Sabha members
by not letting this flawed Bill be passed. Even if it is somehow passed, they (RS members) will know
that it is something Muslim women in the country never wanted," she said. The AIMPLB's action on
taking the fight against the Bill ahead will be decided in the coming days.The Bill
The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017 makes instant triple talaq a criminal
offence and proposes a three-year jail term for a Muslim man who divorces his wife by uttering the
word talaq thrice.

Personal law board misleading Muslims on talaq bill: Activists54

April 4 Days after the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) held meet of women
at Azad Maidan to protest the talaq bill, a group of activists and scholars slammed the board
for "misleading the community and trying to present misogyny and patriarchy as Islamic laws".
At a news conference called by the Indian Muslims for Secular Democracy (IMSD) on
Tuesday, the activists attacked the Board for "mishandling" the triple talaq issue. "It is the same
Board which had filed an affidavit in the court saying that if triple talaq is banned Muslim men
would murder their wives. The Board should first apologise to the Muslim women for
misrepresenting them," said IMSD's co-convener Feroze Mithiborwala.Islamic scholar Zeenat
Shaukat Ali, differing with members of IMSD who are against the talaq bill, said that instant
divorce is a crime and there should be a deterrent to it. "Instead of three years, the bill should
make triple talaq punishable with one year's imprisonment," Ali said. "But more than that,
the Muslim Board must introspect and see why it has has failed to live up to the trust the
community. So many years have passed since the Shah Bano case in 1986. Why didn't it come
out with laws which are not discriminatory and don't take the Sharia to medievalism," she
asked.Senior Urdu columnist Hasan Kamal questioned the relevance of the personal law board.

54
The Times of India, April 4, 2018

57 | P a g e
 "The board has lost its utility. It should dissolve itself now," he said. Kamal added that, by
holding huge rallies of women, the board might make the Supreme Courtprejudicial against
Muslims. "The Supreme Court has declared triple talaq null and void. Now the impression is
being created that the court is interfering in Islamic laws," he said. He added that the
government should desist from framing a law against triple talaq and deal with the cases under
the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Haseena Khan of Bebaak Collective slammed the board for "bringing women on the roads with
slogans like Islam is in danger".

Thousands of Muslim women protest against triple talaq Bill55

April 4 Ask why a civil wrong is made out to be a criminal offenceThousands of Muslim
women from Panvel, Navi Mumbai and Raigad district gathered outside the Panvel Tehsildar’s office
on Tuesday and held a silent protest against the triple talaq bill passed by the Lok Sabha.Mufti Abdullah
Dolare, president, Panvel Ulama Committee, said, “The Supreme Court has passed an order saying that
triple talaq is unconstitutional. Then what was the need to criminalise it? If the man is arrested and put
behind bars for three years, who will look after his family and provide them maintenance?”Sumaiya
Noumani, whose father is a member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), said,
“We believe that the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, was passed in
haste. It was processed without consulting religious scholars and intellectuals of the community. The
Bill is against the Constitution, and is anti-women and anti-children. The matter is also anti-social as a
civil contract is penalised by converting a civil matter into a criminal offence.”Ms. Noumani said she
was hurt that President Ram Nath Kovind said that ‘Muslim women were captive to political cause’
while addressing the joint session of Parliament. She said, “Such remarks are direct insult and attack
on our community. We condemn the approach of the present government made through remarks of the
President. We demand that the statement be expunged and government stop hurting the sentiments of
the minority community. We believe in our Sharia law and trust the words mentioned in it.”A charter
of demands was handed over to the Panvel Tehsildar and copies of it will be sent to the Raigad District
Collector, the President and the Prime Minister

.Muslim women protest against Triple Talaq Bill56

55
The Hindu, April 4, 2018
56
NDTV, April 5, 2018

58 | P a g e
 April 5 Muslim women from across the country took out a massive rally on Wednesday at Ramlila
Maidan to protest the Triple Talaq Bill. The bill was passed by the Centre in Lok Sabha in December
last year.Protesting against the passage of the bill, women from the community took out a silent rally,
and said the move was an attack on Sharia Law. "The rally is designed against the wishes of Muslim
women; it is anti-children and will have adverse ramifications against the community," said Nazia, a
protester, who had travelled to the Capital from Aligarh.The protesting women said that the Centre
passed the bill even when the Supreme Court had struck down triple talaq as unconstitutional. A bench
of the apex court had passed the judgement in August last year, striking down the practice with a 3:2
majority.All India Muslim Personal Board (AIMPLB) member, Dr Asma Zehra said that while the
community welcomes the judgement, the politicisation of the issue needs to be condemned. "Women
across the country suffer due to so many other pressing issues — female foeticide, divorces, dowry and
bride-burning — and yet, triple talaq has been used as a tool to marginalise the marginalised," said
Zehra, adding that the bill was a means to interfere in the Muslim Personal Law.Massive protests
against the bill have been witnessed across the country, with Muslim women holding a rally last week
in Mumbai as well. Protesters said that the rally, held at Azad Maidan on March 30, was the 180th such
rally.AIPMLB, in its statement, said that despite massive rallies against the government's "nefarious
designs", the issue has not found much traction in the media yet. "It is surprising that millions of Muslim
women are demonstrating in all the important cities against the bill, and the remarks by the Honourable
President while opening the two sessions of the budgetary session of Parliament, has not found its due
space in the media," said the release.

AIMPLB trying to mislead Muslims on talaq bill57

April 5 A group of and scholar's slammed All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB),
days after it held women meet at Azad Maidan to protest talaq bill. They alleged that the board
is "misleading the community and trying to present misogyny and patriarchy as Islamic
law's"The Indian Muslims for Secular Democracy (IMSD) attacked board in a press conference
called by them and said that the board is "mishandling" the triple talaq issue. "it is the same
Board which has filed an affidavit in the court saying that if triple talaq is banned Muslim men
will murder their wives. The Board first apologies to the Muslim women for misrepresenting
them", said IMSDs co-convener Feroze Mithiborwala.Zeenat Shaukat Ali an Islamic scholar
has different views, she differs from IMSD members who are against the talaq bill and said,

57
The Times of India, April 5, 2018

59 | P a g e
instant talaq is a crime and there should be a deterrent to it. "Instead of three years, the bill
should make triple talaq punishable for one year's imprisonment", Ali said. "Muslim Board
must introspect and see why it has failed to live up to the trust of the community. So many
years have passed since the case of Shah Bano in 1986. Why didn't it come out with the laws
that are not discriminatory and don't take the Sharia to medievalism", she asked.
Haseena Khan of Bebaak Collective also slammed the board for "bringing women on the roads
with slogans like Islam is in danger". The relevance of the personal law board was questioned
by the senior Urdu columnist Hasan Kamal. He said, " The Board has lost its utility. It should
dissolve itself now". Kamal added that, by holding huge rallies of women, the Board might
make the Supreme Court prejudicial against Muslims. "The Supreme Court had decided triple
talaq null and void. Now the impression is being created that the court is interfering in Islamic
laws", he said. He advised that the government must desist from framing a law against triple
talaq and deal with the cases under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,
2005.

Muslim women hold rally against 'Triple Talaq' in Beed

April 7 Hordes of Muslim women descended in a rally at Adat Market ground on Saturday to
protest against the government's interference in Sharia (Muslim Personal Law) and its intention
to get the contentious 'Triple Talaq' Bill passed in Parliament.As reported earlier, a number of
morchas were taken out in various cities of the state as per the direction of the Muslim Personal
Law Board.Eminent Muslim personalities and scholars including Saleha Siddika from Parbhani,
Sabhia Khan andFirdaus Fatima from Aurangabad addressed the gathering at the ground.They
alleged that the Act was drafted without taking the Muslim community in confidence. They
expressed apprehensions that if the Act gets passed in the Rajya Sabha, the Muslim women
would not be able to live with dignity and would not enjoy freedom.Some speakers advised the
government to not 'interfere' in their lives and let them live as per the Muslim Personal Law.
Later, a five-member delegation of Muslim women submitted a memorandum to the resident
district collector.

60 | P a g e
 Statement By Bebaak Collective Condemning Right Wing Forces In The
Aftermath Of The Triple Talaq Judgement58

April 9 We, Bebaak Collective and concerned individuals who have been following the Triple Talaq
judgement in all its ramifications and have been associated with various social movements, urge our
fellow women’s groups and human rights groups to reflect on the role of the conservative right-
wing forces in the aftermath of the Triple Talaq judgment of 22nd August
2017.The honourable Supreme Court of India invalidated the practice of instant one-sided Triple
Talaq in its three–two division bench historic judgment, implying that the Muslim couple continues to
be wedded even when the man utters talaq arbitrarily. However, the current government took a
regressive step and introduced a Bill criminalizing the practice and bestows power in the hands of any
third party to complain against the errant husband.This is a blatant move to criminalize the community
without taking cognizance of the living struggles of Muslim women or questions regarding their social
security. This Bill is introduced without going into any participatory process of consultation with
women’s groups, or with an expert committee. Besides, it is leaving no stone unturned to pass the Bill,
and whoever critiques this government’s move is being maligned.In the aftermath of this Bill, there is
also a serious backlash towards various progressive voices and incessant mobilization of humongous
numbers of Muslim women by conservative Muslim forces often led by AIMPLB (All India Muslim
Personal Law Board) and other religious organizations, who are on the streets proclaiming “Islam is in
danger” and vociferously challenges the criminalizing Bill as introduced by the government.These
images of women occupying streets bring back the memory of Shah Bano’s times when Muslim men
took out rallies demanding an overturn of the Shah Bano judgement of 1986. We strongly oppose the
criminalization of Triple Talaq Bill but are not against the changes in Muslim Personal Law, which
curb women’s rights. While we unequivocally resist this government’s move to criminalize the practice
as we firmly believe that gender rights cannot be equated with the criminalization of violence, we
equally resist the role of conservative Muslim voices who are mobilizing women to defend patriarchal
practices and equating women’s rights with the protection of religion.Our engagement with AIMPLB
has been for several years now and it is astounding how they are mobilizing women now and did not
occupy the streets to protest the beef ban or demand implementations of the Sachar Committee Report
that talks about the education, livelihood and economic condition of minority women. This framing of
Muslim women within the context of marriage reinforces the marriage institution as the sole location
of women’s lives and marital crisis as the primary sites of violence, going beyond economic

58
Feminismindia.com, April 9, 2018

61 | P a g e
exploitation or other forms of structural violence that disempowers her.We strongly believe that
the right-wing groups have united with various political parties and religious organizations to oppress
the voices of all progressive Muslim women who created democratic spaces for themselves and
are talking differently and opposing the bill from a gender rights perspective. This is indeed a very
important and crucial departure from the religious perspective and does not talk about taking pride
in sharia.AIMPLB, along with all other religious groups, drew a conspiracy and mobilized Muslim
women in the name of religion, by giving a call, “Islam Khatre Mein Hai” which is not just problematic
but also propaganda, as it sidelines women’s issues and highlights religious faith. Whenever women
stepped out and voiced their struggles, their issues have been forcibly shadowed by the arguments of
“threat to religion“.These groups have become successful in implementing their propaganda by
mobilizing women to support the rallies and post photos of themselves saying “My Sharia My Pride“,
who claim to be progressive and feminists. This is not just saddening but also threatening to the
struggles of all Muslim women who have been fighting against patriarchal practices that occur under
the blanket of religion by questioning Personal Law, religious groups and also repressive praxis of state-
sponsored violence.We also believe that these majoritarian right-wing groups feed the minority right-
wing and give them strength to exhibit their tokenistic approach towards women’s rights by pushing
away women’s voices in leadership/decision-making roles, in total. The role of AIMPLB, religious
groups and political parties in the issues of Muslim women threatens decades of Muslim women’s
struggles and tries to further oppress Muslim women.In this conundrum, the government’s equating of
gender rights with retribution and AIMPLB’s face as the protector of Islam poses political impasses.
The right-wing government threatens criminalization which inadvertently makes Muslim women more
vulnerable and treats them as the pawn in their larger Hindutva agenda. The conservative voices within
the community move to protect religion, equating reforms in Personal Law with debilitation of faith
and religion.While each stakeholder shows concern for gender rights and poses numerical strength to
advocate their agenda, the history of the women’s movement, which has imagined and re-imagined
social realities of women, is getting muted. It is this unholy alliance of the Hindu right-wing
wing forces and the conservatives of the community that mars the complexity of Muslim women’s lived
realities.This discredits the female leadership of the community and also erodes the democratic spaces
that have been created by them. We seek our fellow groups and concerned individuals to introspect the
way things have unfolded and imagine newer ways in which gender justice can be articulated

62 | P a g e
 .Maulana Wali Rahmani makes a U-turn on ‘Triple Talaq Bill’ , calls off
agitations59

April 8 In a surprise move the All India Muslim Personal Law Board has called off nationwide
agitations against Triple Talaq Bill of Modi government. Board’s general secretary Maulana Wali
Rahmani in a press release has instructed to wind up all agitations planned against Triple Talaq Bill
being held across the country.Maulana Rahmani didn’t give any clarification regarding his U-Turn on
the agitation. Interestingly the 4th April protest which is scheduled for tomorrow has been exempted
from his wind-up message.It should be noted that Board’s decision to include Muslim women in the
protest ware being criticized from many quarters.On the contrast Maulana Rahmani has appealed to the
well-wishers of the community surrounding Delhi –NCR to bring Muslim women in large numbers to
Ramlila Maidan and make the event a grand success.Maulana didn’t mention the reason behind his
sudden decision to call off all protests and agitations against Triple Talaq Bill being held under All
India Muslim Personal Law Board across the country, nor he clarified whether the aim of the protests
and agitations have been achieved.

Clerics term Muslim Women Bill as interference into Shariat60

April 16 A congregation of Muslim clerics has termed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on
Marriage) Bill 2017 as Centre's "interference" into Shariat law.The congregation which was named as
"Deen Bacho, Desh Bachao conference" was organised by Imarat Shariah at Phulwari Sharif, Patna,
yesterday.The congregation passed an unanimous resolution demanding that the bill be
withdrawn.Presiding the conference, Imarat Shariah - Bihar,Jharkhand and Odisha - Amir-e-
Shariyat Mohammad Wali Rahmani appealed to the people to find out solutions to their problems
within the ambit of the Constitution.

59
Muslimmirror.com, April 8, 2018
60
Business Standard, April 16, 2018

63 | P a g e
CHAPTER-V CONCLUSION

The government has shown a stern and an uncompromising attitude towards felonious practice
involving extreme harassment onto the women. However, it is required that the government
must bring into limelight the policies curbing this menace as soon as possible. Apart from this
looking at the illiteracy level and the dominance over the women, it is required that the
government must allocate the responsibility over to some organisations which must work to
educate the women about various laws that have been enacted to protect their rights and to
encourage them to speak against the undue behaviour of the husbands.The government must
try to incorporate various other practices which harm the respect of the women. Practices such
as ‘nikah Halala’ one of the most outrageous practices involving the illicit desire of the
religious leaders must be amputated as soon as possible. Other practices such as polygamy,
minors marriage, mental and physical harassment of the wife, forced sex by the husband,
marriage with huge age gap must be curbed.It can be seen from the current scenario related to
the Triple Talaq Bill, that although the Central government iss quite keen on making it an
enactment, however, it seems very uncertain, keeping in view the numerous protests from
various muslim organizations, including most of the women friendly organizations. Although
the Supreme Court has declared the practice as arbitrary and unconstitutional, the bill needs to
be modified and represented in the parliament, after removing the act of instantaneous talaq
from the category of cognizable and non bailable offences. The bill may also be modified using
a different approach, by changing the law regarding maintenance of muslim women, and
keeping the act of pronouncing triple talaq as a cognizable and non bailable offence.

64 | P a g e
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Books

1- Choudhury, Cyra Akila (2008), "(Mis)Appropriated Liberty: Identity, Gender Justice and
Muslim Personal Law Reform in India
2- Esposito, John L.; DeLong-Bas, Natana J. (2001). Women in Muslim Family Law (2nd
ed.)
3- Joseph, Suad; Naǧmābādī, Afsāna (2003), Encyclopedia of Women and Islamic Cultures:
Family, Law and Politics
4- Murshid, Tazeen Mahnaz (2003), "Inheritance: Contemporary Practice – South Asia
5- Rao, Aparna (2003), "Kinship, Descent Systems and State – South Asia
6- Mukhopadhyay, Maitrayee (August 1994), Construction of Gender Identity: Women, the
State and Personal Laws in India

2. Websites
1- :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_talaq_in_India
2- https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/here-are-the-women-who-took-their-fight-against-triple-talaq-to-
supreme-court-1740412
3- https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/supreme-court-bars-triple-talaq-till-
parliament-makes-a-law-heres-a-11-point-primer/articleshow/60169892.cms
4- http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/no-solid-numbers-for-triple-talaq-but-divorce-data-show-
interesting-trends-4641016/
5- https://shariasource.blog/2017/09/11/shayara-bano-v-union-of-india-etc-supreme-court-of-india-
judgment-on-constitutionalism-of-triple-%E1%B9%ADalaq/
6- http://www.livelaw.in/breaking-sc-verdict-constitutional-validity-triple-talaq-tomorrow/
7- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/personal-law-board-misleading-muslims-on-talaq-
bill-activists/articleshow/63603685.cms
8- http://www.freepressjournal.in/mumbai/mumbai-bmma-recommends-amendment-while-enacting-
muslim-family-law/1249295
9- https://thewire.in/religion/review-misconceptions-over-instant-triple-talaq-persist
10- https://www.siasat.com/news/muslim-women-silenced-aurangabad-triple-talaq-bill-protest-
1333685/

65 | P a g e
11- https://www.nyoooz.com/news/hyderabad/1065385/muslim-women-silenced-aurangabad-with-
triple-talaq-bill-protest/
12- http://www.thehansindia.com/posts/index/National/2018-03-20/Chandrababu-Triple-Talaq-Bill-
shows-grudge-against-Muslims/367916
13- https://news.webindia123.com/news/Articles/India/20180318/3301222.html
14- http://indianexpress.com/article/india/women-groups-meet-law-minister-seek-standing-
committee-for-triple-talaq-bill-5056813/
15- https://www.firstpost.com/india/aimplb-says-triple-talaq-bill-is-against-constitution-and-
fundamental-rights-vows-to-remove-flaws-4342735.html
16- https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/aimplb-against-triple-talaq-bill-moots-action-
against-member-over-suggestion-to-shift-babri/story-uwcFNCE1Mvkq2QKye4ef1O.html
17- http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/telangana/2018/feb/12/criminalisation-of-instant-triple-
talaq-is-anti-women-aimplb-1772046.html
18- https://www.nyoooz.com/news/hyderabad/1031823/aimplb-to-continue-efforts-to-stop-triple-
talaq-bill/
19- http://www.newindianexpress.com/opinions/2018/feb/13/dealing-with-a-rajya-sabha-roadblock-
1772572.html
20- https://www.hindustantimes.com/jaipur/triple-talaq-bill-a-conspiracy-against-muslim-women-
personal-law-board/story-4xsNakhC6R46QR6FczGU5N.html
21- https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news/12992-you-make-anti-triple-talaq-law-we-will-break-
it-madani

66 | P a g e