|follow us on twitter||Follow @intolegalworld|
Written By: Priyanshi Srivastava
The term “Triple Talaq” is commonly translated as ‘Repudiation’ or simply ‘Divorce’. In classical Islamic law, it refers to the husband’s right to dissolve the marriage by simply announcing to his wife that ‘he repudiates her’. The definition clearly implies that practice of ‘Triple Talaq’ impact the social status and dignity of Muslim women and it renders them ‘unequal’ and ‘vulnerable’ as compared to men of their community as well as women belonging to other communities.
Thus, this important issue involves ‘sentiments’ and is termed as the practice of ‘patriarchal values’ and ‘traditions’ about the role of women in society. In the very legal perspective, it violates the right of women to human dignity, social esteem and self worth; which are vital facets of her “Right To Life” under Article 21 of the constitution of India while in case of “SARA BAI v. RABIA BAI” (1905), The Bombay High Court recognised Triple Talaq as irrevocable footing.
The questionable part is that, in a so-called ‘secular democracy’ whether religion can be a reason to deny equal status and dignity which is at all nonnegotiable under the constitution of India? No, no one has such right so this vulnerable practice should not be practiced anymore and is invalid. As well as, the conferment of social status based on patriarchal values or one i.e. at the mercy of men folk is incompatible and is a violation of the spirit of article 14 and article 15 under the constitution of India.
This is a kind of practice in which the husband, quite often, in the heat of anger or desperation, even in his dream or in unconsciousness or at a time when he is insane or even in the influence of alcohol, pronounces Talaq thrice in one go, sometimes over phone or text. In SHAH BANO CASE (1985), the woman receives a post mentioning divorce thrice.
The propositions of triple talaq mentioned that invalidating triple talaq will lead to the violation of article 25 i.e. protection of freedom of religion but with due respect I would like to rebut the contentions by mentioning that the centre has already committed that article 25was not absolute to the community in this regard because the regressive practices violates Right to Equality, Life, and Liberty.
Two of the most interesting part of this debatable topic is- First, A petition was started by Muslim Rashtriya Manch (MRM) ; an Islamic organization affiliated with RSS (Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh) calling for the abolition of Triple Talaq, it received signatures of moreover a million Muslims from across India with women in majority.
The second most interesting part is that Mrs. Salma Ansari, the wife of our honourable Vice- President Mr. Hamid Ansari mentioned that there is nothing like triple talaq practice over there in Quran, the one who has read it in Arabic language would be known to this fact as it is mentioned in Rasool but the Clerics who interpreted the Quran in familiar languages like Hindi misguides the men and women in India and its written in each and every Muslim law book referred by practicing lawyers, judges, students, law learner or law learned that- triple talaq commands neither the sanction of holy Quran nor the approval of holy Prophet.
Thus, the noticeable points are that article 13 of constitution of India stipulates that any law that infringes upon fundamental rights shall be void and the practice of triple talaq should, therefore, be declared invalid, since, they violate the fundamental right to equality i.e. article 14, article 15 as well as article 21 i.e. Right to life and personal liberty. The fact actually remains that every woman who is subject to the said law live under threat, fear or prospect of these practices being invoked against them.
According to me, the triple talaq practice is not at all valid. Some people are maintaining a silence on this issue, this reminds me of the scene in the Mahabharata in which Draupadi was being disrobed in an assembly and she asks a question to the gathering as to who is responsible for this?….no one was able to utter even a single word. At that time Vidur- the minister of the kingdom, said people who have committed the crime, those who are the accomplices and who maintained silence on the issue are equally responsible.