The Supreme Court has questioned the validity of talaq-e-hasan, a form of triple talaq in which a Muslim man can divorce his wife by pronouncing the word 'talaq' once a month for three months, as the top judiciary revisited the issue of divorce among Muslims. Eight years ago, the court had outlawed instant triple talaq, or talaq-e-biddat, calling the practice "bad in law." Talaq-e-hasan is another form of triple talaq, different from talaq-e-biddat, in which divorce is granted instantly.
"How is this allowed in modern society?" asked a bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan, and NK Singh while hearing multiple petitions challenging the validity of talaq-e-hasan this morning.
The court also intervened in the case of a Muslim woman who has been struggling with her child's school admission since her former husband did not provide his signature while divorcing her. Benazir Heena was given a divorce by her husband, Ghulam Akhtar, through his lawyer, and then he got remarried, her counsel informed the court.
"She will indulge herself in polyandry because of her husband. In the 11-page talaq notice, the sign of the husband is missing. Talaq was pronounced by the husband's advocate," said the counsel.
Her husband's advocate argued that it is a common practice in Islam. To this, Justice Kant asked, "Can this be a practice? How are these new innovative ideas being invented?"
"What prevents the husband from directly communicating with her? He has such an ego that even for divorce, he cannot speak to her. How can you promote this in a modern society? It is the dignity of a woman," the court remarked on the lawyer communicating the divorce formalities to the woman instead of the husband.
"If talaq is to take place as per religious practice, then the entire procedure has to be followed as it is prescribed," it asserted.
The court also sought to know from the woman which school had denied admission to her child and expressed concern about the state of women across the country when even journalists and doctors are facing such things.
It also sought information on the existing types of divorces among Muslims and summoned the husband during the next hearing. "Let him come here and unconditionally provide what she wants," the court said.
Praising the woman for choosing to fight her case, it questioned what would happen to those who are less privileged.
"We salute this woman who has chosen to fight for her rights. But there may be a poor woman who does not have resources. If she remarries, her earlier husband comes and says she is indulging in (polyandry)? Should a civilised society allow this kind of practice?" the court observed.
