Triple talaq verdict: SC to pronounce verdict on Tuesday

A five-judge bench in the Supreme Court is likely to pronounce the verdict on the batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the practices of triple talaq on Tuesday.

A bench had earlier reserved its verdict on May 18 after six-days of marathon hearings.

Parties including the Centre, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, the All India Muslim Women Personal Law Board and others had made their submissions on for and against the practice.

SC to give #TripleTalaq judgement tom. 5-judges heard the matter for 6 days during the summer. 1/2 imp judgments by Khehar in his last week

— Ritika Jain (@riotsjain) August 21, 2017

The apex court at that time had asked Muslim bodies as to how can a practice like triple talaq be a matter of 'faith' when they have been asserting that it is 'patriarchal', 'bad in theology' and 'sinful'.

The five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice JS Khehar had also taken note of repeated submissions of the AIMPLB and former union minister and senior lawyer Salman Khurshid, who is assisting it in personal capacity, that triple talaq was not mentioned in holy Quran and is rather "sinful", "irregular", "patriarchal", "bad in theology" and "undesirable", but the court should not examine it.

"You (Khurshid) say it is sinful. How can a sinful practice be said to be a matter of faith... Has it (triple talaq) going on in consistently for 1,400 years? The answer is 'yes'. Has it going on in the world? The answer is 'no'. The system itself say it is horrendous and bad," the bench, also comprising justices Kurian Joseph, RF Nariman, UU Lalit and Abdul Nazeer, had said.

The observations were made when Khurshid was advancing rejoinder arguments by emphasising that the practice was sinful and bad in theology which cannot be good in law. He, however, had argued that the court should not examine it.

"That is why, what is sinful cannot be part of practice. If it is bad in theology, it cannot be accepted in law... What is morally wrong cannot be legally right. What is not fully moral, it cannot be legal," the bench had observed, as per PTI.

Senior advocate Amit Singh Chadha, appearing for Shayara Bano, one of the victims of triple talaq, had started rebuttal arguments quoting AIMPLB's stand that this was sinful and patriarchal practice and had said this could not be integral to Islam.

The patriarchal practice of triple talaq in a male- dominated community is not recognised by many schools of thought, he had said and had added, "It is a bad, undesirable and sinful practice and violates constitutional guarantees of Muslim women."

Asking the court not to resort to "hands off" policy, Chadha had said, "The only right, the only remedy to the citizens is to come to this court which is the custodian of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. We have no other option. My only remedy is to come to this protector, enforcer and this guardian of my fundamental rights."