SC issues notice on plea to declare ‘Talaq-e-Kinaya’ , ‘Talaq-e-Bain’ void

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to the centre on a plea seeking direction or declaration to declare “all forms of unilateral extra-judicial Talaq, including Talaq-e-Kinaya and Talaq-e-Bain” as void and unconstitutional.

The petitioner, Syeda Ambreen, a doctor by profession from Karnataka, said she was married to her husband as per Muslim rites on October 22, 2020, and after the marriage, her husband and his family members tortured her physically and mentally for dowry. 
When Petitioner’s father refused to give dowry, her husband, also a doctor, gave her Talaq-E-Kinaya/Talaq-E-Bain through a Qazi and lawyer, which is totally against Articles 14, 15, 21 and 25, plea stated.

A bench of Justices S Abdul S Nazeer also tagged the centre in a similar plea and remarked, “This is very unfortunate. I was shocked on reading about it.” Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay appearing for the petitioner told the bench that such talaqs are new things and no other country practised this.
The PIL also sought direction to the Centre to frame guidelines for “gender neutral religion neutral uniform grounds of divorce and uniform procedure of divorce for all citizens”.

She claimed that Talaq-e-kinaya/Talaq-e-bain (an instantaneous and irrevocable and extra-judicial form of talaq, in a single sitting, either pronounced or in written/electronic form) was given to her by her husband.

There was continuous pressure from in-laws and Qazi to take ‘Khula or further Talaq-e-Hasan’ notices would be sent monthly basis, and not a single mediation between husband and wife was attempted by Qazi. An instant, irrevocable and unconstitutional Talaq practice was entertained bypassing Madhya Pradesh High Court by January 2022 guidelines stating “Qazi can just act as a mediator to settle disputes but can’t adjudicate them and pass orders like a decree,” stated the plea.

It went on to say that it was arbitrary, irrational, and not only violated Articles 14, 15, 21, and 25 of the Indian Constitution, but also completely violated international civil and human rights conventions.