List After Vacation: Supreme Court On Plea Challenging Talaq-e-Hasan

The Supreme Court on Thursday said that the plea challenging the practice of Talaq e Hasan will be listed after vacation.

A vacation Bench of Justices MR Shah and Aniruddha Bose refused to give an urgent hearing to the plea and asked to list it after vacation.

Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay who was appearing for the petitioner has mentioned the plea and sought an urgent hearing.

During the hearing, the Court also asked the petitioner advocate to move a concerned High Court with his grievances and warned that it may dismiss the plea.

The petitioner advocate Upadhyay urged the Court to list the matter after vacations.

He told the court that the petition has national interest.

A plea has been moved in Supreme Court seeking to declare that Talaq-E-Hasan and all other forms of Unilateral Extra-Judicial Talaq as unconstitutional and sought to issue direction to the Centre to frame the guideline for Gender Neutral Religion Neutral Uniform Grounds of Divorce and Uniform Procedure of Divorce for all.

As per the petitioner, the practice of Talaq-E-Hasan and other forms of unilateral extra-judicial talaq is neither harmonious with the modern principles of human rights and gender equality nor an integral part of the Islamic faith.

"Many Islamic nations have restricted such practice, while it continues to vex the Indian society in general and Muslim women like the Petitioner in particular," the petitioner submitted.

The petitioner further submitted that the practice also wreaks havoc on the lives of many women and their children, especially those belonging to the weaker economic sections of society.

The petition has sought to declare that "Talaq-E-Hasan and all other forms of Unilateral Extra-Judicial Talaq" are void and unconstitutional.

The petition has been filed by one Muslim woman, who claimed to be a journalist as well as a victim of unilateral Extra-Judicial Talaq-E-Hasan.

The petitioner was married to a man as per Muslim rites on December 25, 2020 and has a male child from wedlock.

The petitioner claimed that her parents were compelled to give her a dowry and later she was tortured for not getting a big dowry.

She also claimed that her husband and his family members tortured her physically and mentally not only after the marriage but also during the pregnancy which made her seriously ill.

When the petitioner's father refused to give dowry then her husband gave her unilateral Extra-Judicial Talaq-E-Hasan through a lawyer, which is totally against Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, and UN Conventions, the petitioner's lawyer said.

The petitioner has urged to direct and declare the practice of Talaq-E-Hasan and all other forms of unilateral extra-judicial talaq" void and unconstitutional for being arbitrary, irrational, and violative of Articles 14, 15, 21, and 25.

The petitioner also sought to direct and declare Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 is void and unconstitutional for being violative of Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, in so far as it validates the practice of Talaq-E-Hasan and other forms of unilateral extra-judicial talaq.

It also sought to declare the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, is void and unconstitutional for being violative of Articles 14, 15, 21, and 25 in so far as it fails to secure for Muslim women the protection from Talaq-E-Hasan and other forms of unilateral extra-judicial talaq.

The petitioner also sought to issue directions to frame guidelines for Gender Neutral Religion Neutral Uniform Grounds of Divorce and Uniform Procedure of Divorce for all.