Free 750 words essay on Triple Talaq (3 Talaq ) banned in India for school and college students.
A week after 70th Independence Day of India, came a historic, yet impending judgment for over decades, promising liberation from the misconceived codification of Quraan in the Shariat law Act, 1937. The Triple Talaq Verdict, came as a sigh of relief and solace to the women fraternity of Muslim community by doing away the mala fide practice of Talaq-e-biddat, thereby, declaring it unconstitutional. The verdict pronounced by the five-judge constitution bench was headed by Chief Justice of India, Justice Khehar. However, it was contrary to the expectations, as the outcome was of 3:2 majority, lacking an element of unanimity. Nevertheless, the majority judgment prevails.
Furthermore, the judgment could not address properly the issue of human rights, involved with the abominable practice of ‘nikah halala’- a Muslim law practice making mandatory for women to get married to another man, in order to restore her first marriage”. It is something which poses grave psychological injuries on them. Albeit, the landmark judgment is a toast to the spirit of women who dared to push the envelope of societal pressure and could raise their voice against the perpetual indignity against the women, in the form of morbid matrimonial customary practices dominated by male chauvinistic mindset.
What is Talaq-e-biddat..?
It is an instant divorce custom being practiced among the Muslim fraternity, conceding the balance of ending the matrimonial alliance, in the favor of their male counterparts, i.e., husbands, by simply pronouncing the word “TALAAQ” three times. The unfair practice does not take into account the intricacies of human nature governed by sudden emotional outbursts in the heat of the moment and sometimes giving them an easy way out to further their desire of polygamy. Off late, there were growing innumerable instances of it gaining a tech savvy dimension as well, through the use of electronic media. Therefore, this chauvinistic and paternalistic practice, as declared by the Supreme court, shall ultra vires not only infringe the right to equality (Article 14) but also is gender discriminatory. Hence, no amount of argument that the judgment is an intrusion to the personal laws of the religion, can fairly justify its perpetual practice, profession, and propagation.
Right to freedom of Religion
India is a secular state and Right to Freedom of Religion (Article 25-Article 28) being guaranteed in Part 3 of our sanctimonious constitution is a proof of it. Article 25 “extends safeguards to the personal law of a religion by giving it the position of a fundamental right”, as being quoted by the Chief Justice JS Khehar and Justice Abdul Nazeer. Furthermore, CJI Khehar and Justice Nazeer and Joseph bring forth that the Government was competent enough to reform personal laws on the ground like “Public Order, Health and Morality”, exceptions which have been provided for under Article 25 (2) of the Constitution. Hence, the shallow arguments put forward by Hadids, clerics, law boards that the nullification of Talaq-e-biddat would amount to severing Shariat Law Act, 1937, holds no water. As the Shariat enjoys the legal sanction and Triple TALAAQ being a subset of it, must pass its test of arbitrariness. In addition, the Quranic verses do not recognize Talaq-e-biddat, it is, in turn, proclaims such practice sinful.
Turning the tables
Triple TALAAQ has been declared illegal in theocratic states such as Pakistan, Bangladesh, Turkey, Cyprus, Tunisia, Algeria, Malaysian state of Sarawak, Iran, Sri Lanka, Jordan, Indonesia, UAE, Qatar, Sudan, Morocco, Egypt, Iraq, Brunei, and Malaysia. This can be attributed to the behemoth resistance being offered to the reform by the religious law boards, giving it a garb of violation of secularism. Supreme Court described the law as being retrograde and unworthy of protection, after ensuring that the scrapping of practice remains absolved both from the touchstone of constitutional principles and Quranic injunctions. Even in the Quran, it is held in “Ishtehar”, that there can be timely improvisations subjected to the changes accompanied with space and time. Moreover, “Shariat” is a codification of laws in the light of Quran, and both can not be put on the equivalent pedestal of divinity.
The verdict shall open the Pandora’s box for implementing Uniform Civil Code (Article 44). However, it must be realized that holding responsible only a certain quarter or community of population, behind its delayed introduction is a mistaken belief. The verdict ought to be conceived as a rescue measure to a part of the repressed section of society, thus, it must be protected from giving it a heated religious angle. Also, that, the stakes of every community are equal, causing behind the implications in realizing the goals of bringing the state under a single code which will put an end to multiple litigations and complexities, catering to common provisions related to marriage, inheritance, and property.