The Supreme Court in the case observed where the plea was moved challenging the constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 in the month of November 2023.
The Division bench comprising of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice M.M. Sundresh was hearing the matter, wherein it has been requested by the petitioners that one matter to be treated as the lead matter in which all pleadings could be completed.
The court in the case Amir Rashadi Madni Vs Union of India order that it is to be treated as the lead petition and for all pleadings which are to be filed in the present matter.
It has also been stated by the Apex Court in its judgement dated 22.08.2017 in the case Shayara Bano v. Union of India & Ors staed and had declared the ‘talaq-e-biddat’ or any other similar form of talaq while having the effect of instantaneous and irrevocable divorce which is pronounced as unconstitutional by a Muslim husband.
Therefore, the triple talaq law- Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act 2019 was passed by the Central government on 31.07.2019, wherein it criminalize the pronouncement of divorce in a such manner and prescribing a punishment of up to three years imprisonment for the same.
However, in the case batch of writ petitions has been filed before the Supreme Court challenging the legislation.
The petitioner in the plea filed contended that the constitutional validity of the Act and it has been submitted that it being unislamic and the same is violative of Article 13, Article 14, Article 15, Article 21 and Article 25 of the Constitution of India. Thus, the contentions raised in the plea moved by him are as follows:
1. The argument made before the court by the petitioner was that talaq-e-biddat had already been declared invalid and unconstitutional by the aforementioned judgment of the Supreme Court and having no sanctity in law. The verdict passed was binding on all courts of the country in view of Article 141 of the Constitution of India and the legislation criminalizing such talaq was unnecessary.
2. Further, it has been argued by the petitioner in the plea that the Act being contrary to the ethos of the Preamble of the Constitution, Justice, Liberty, Equality, the Fraternity and the Individual Dignity, while having the potential of suffocating the secular character of the Constitution of India.
3. It has also been submitted by the petitioner before the court that since the marriage in Islam is a civil contract, the same may be terminated under certain circumstances, as held in the case Abdul Qadir v. Salima, wherein imposing the criminal liability for a civil wrong was in clear violation of Right to life with dignity and personal liberty of Muslim men.
4. The petitioner in the plea also alleged violation of Article 15 of the Constitution of India as the said Act discriminates against a class of persons on the basis of religion whereas as per the settled law, the applicability of criminal laws is religiously being neutral.
The politician and Islamic scholar, Amir Rashadi Madni moved
the present plea.
