In Shayara Bano v. Union of India, the validity and relevance of triple talaq rose into question. After being married for 15 years, In 2016 Shayara Bano was divorced by Rizwan Ahmed through the medium of Triple Talaq.
Shayara Bano filed a writ petition in the Supreme court against 3 practices under the ambit of Muslim Law.
- Triple talaq
- Nikah halala
In order to comprehend this better, we need to understand the different types of divorces permitted under the purview of Muslim Law. These are
Talaq-E-Biddat is also called triple talaq enabled the husband to attain divorce by uttering the word “talaq” thrice. This form of talaq doesn’t give the parties any scope to arbitrate, settle or resolve their issues.
In February 2017, a constitutional Bench of 5 judges was constituted to hear on the matter. These Judges were,
- Chief Justice Jagdish khehar
- Justice Abdul Nazeer
- Justice Kurian Joseph
- Justice Rohinton Nariman
- Justice U. Lalit
The petitioner here was Shayara Bano, the respondent was Rizwan Ahmed, later on more parties were added as respondents, these are:
- Union of India
- Ministry of Law and Justice
- Ministry of Women and Child Development
- Ministry of Minority affairs
- National Commission for Women
- All India Muslim Personal Law Board
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board here stated that all these above mentioned practices were under the purview of Muslim Personal Law and was outside the Supreme Court’s Jurisdiction.
After receiving the statements of all parties the Supreme Court labelled two issues.
- Whether Instant Triple Talaq is an Essential Practice of Islam
- Whether the practice of Instant Triple Talaq is Violative of Fundamental Rights
In August 2017, The Bench stating that Triple talaq was inconsistent with Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution, declared the practice of instant triple talaq illegal and instructed the Centre to make laws accordingly.
The centre made passed a legislation pertaining to the same in July 2019.