Ishrat Jahan, who is one of the petitioners of instant triple talaq had claimed that two of her children have gone missing. She has submitted her complaint copy at Golabari police station claiming that her seven and thirteen-year old children have been kidnapped.
Ishrat Jahan today went to the Golabari police station, Howrah, West Bengal and filed an official complaint against her in-laws for allegedly kidnapping her children. Ishrat Jahan is one of the petitioners who raised her voice against Triple Talaq. After the verdict of Supreme Court on triple talaq, she has claimed that she is being harassed by her in-laws. Initially, when she filed the complaint, the police immediately stepped-in and begin the probe.
Ishrat Jahan filed the complaint against her brother-in-law, sister-in-law, and her husband. She told the media, “The last time I saw my children was yesterday at around 11:30, since then they are missing.”
Supreme Court upholds Triple Talaq
The Supreme Court on Tuesday gave historic judgment on the basis of majority, speaking out of Triple Talaq in the Indian Muslim community, Triple Talaq was termed as ‘unconstitutional’ and ‘arbitrary’ and said that it was not the ‘part of Islam’. However, in the minority judgment given by two judges, that the ‘Talaq-e-Biddat’ is the issue of the personal law of the Muslim community and it does not violate Article 25 (religious freedom) of the Constitution.
In addition to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), all the parties including Prime Minister, Congress, and women organizations appreciated Supreme Court verdict.
Welcoming the decision of the Supreme Court, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) said that this decision protects the Muslim Personal Law.
At the same time, political parties have given this decision the right to equate Muslim women with gender equality and gender justice.
The Chief Judge, comprising Justice JS Khehar and S. Abdul Nazir of the five judges bench, while announcing the minority verdict, banned Triple Talaq simultaneously for six months and said that meanwhile, the government should consider making a law on this issue.
He also appealed to various political parties to forget their differences and make laws related to it.
The other three judges in the Constitution bench, however, expressed their disagreement with the decision of Justice Khehar and Justice Nazir.
Justice Khehar, Justice Nazir, Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice UU Lalit and Justice Kurian Joseph, said in its 395-page verdict, “After hearing the arguments of all parties, Talaq-a-Biddat (giving three divorces in one go at the same time) was canceled by the majority.”
The Supreme Court has pronounced this verdict on the petition filed by Shayara Bano, Muslim organizations and four other women.
Justice Nariman and Justice Lalit, who were involved in the majority verdict, said, “In view of the situation of three divorces being given at the same time and not being returned, it is natural that any two members of their family cannot have any kind of interaction as a mediator between husband and wife, which is necessary to prevent marriage relations from breaking. ”
He said, “In such a situation it is clear that this form of divorce is clearly arbitrary, which expresses such sentiment that without any effort of reconciliation by a Muslim man to prevent the marriage from breaking up Marital relations can be eliminated in arbitrariness and frenzy. ”
He said, “Therefore, such divorce should be considered to be violative of the basic rights provided by Article 14 of the Constitution.” In addition, the three judges said that the 1937 Sharia Act was also abolished.
Keeping separate views with Justice Khehar and Justice Nazeer, Justice Joseph said, “Whatever is said in the holy Quran, it can not be good in Sharia and in the same way, in the religion, which is said to be bad, it is the eyes of the law. It will be worse in the future. ”
Justice Joseph said that it is very difficult for the Chief Justice to agree on the argument that three divorces should be considered an integral part of the religion and this is part of their personal law.
He said that only because some custom has been going on for hundreds of years and that the tradition in that religion has been clearly stated as inappropriate, that tradition can not be considered statutory.
He said, “Talaq-e-Biddat” is an integral part of religious beliefs in Sunni Muslims who consider the idea, it is associated with their faith, which has been going on for 1,400 years and therefore accept it according to their personal law.”
Justice Khehar said, “Because of being a part of the personal law, it is like the basic rights. Therefore, this tradition can not be eliminated by judicial intervention by saying that the concept of constitutional morality is violative.”
Even in the minority judgment, it was also said that a large population of Muslim women are in favor of Triple Talaq, declaring it lawfully unacceptable.
In the minority verdict, the Supreme Court said that religion is a subject of faith, not logic, and no court has a place to accept the principle of equality against traditional customs.
He said that it is not the court’s duty to determine whether religious customs are rational or progressive or conservative
In his judgment given by three votes in favor of two, he said that three divorces do not receive constitutional protection because it is “arbitrary and crazy”, and this causes the possibility of reconciliation between husband and wife.
Giving examples of the amendments made in the Muslim Personal Law throughout the world, Justice Khehar instructed the central government to form proper laws on Talaq-e-Biddat.
Justice Khair ordered the Muslim men not to divorce their wife on the basis of Triple Talaq for six months.