The hearing on the issue of three divorce cases is still going on in the Supreme Court. The Constitution bench of the five judges of the Supreme Court is going to hear every day till May 19 in this case. In the Bench, besides Chief Justice JS Kher, Justice Joseph Kurien, RF Nariman UU Lalit and Abdul Nazir are included.
Three divorce unconstitutional – Jethmalani
During the hearing, senior lawyer Ram Jethmalani also appeared on behalf of a victim of three divorces. He said that Article 14 and 15 of the Constitution give equal rights to all citizens and in their light three divorces are unconstitutional. Jethmalani claimed that he is a student of Islam like the other religions. He told Hazrat Mohammad one of the greatest prophets of God and said that his message is worthy of praise. Jethmalani said, ‘The Quran says that if you are in search of knowledge then you are on the path of Allah. The ink of the seeker of a knowledge is more than the martyr’s blood. ‘ In the opinion of Jethmalani, women can not discriminate on the basis of their gender only, and any law deciding in the Supreme Court should not be to promote discrimination.
Court questions
In today’s hearing, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, JS Kher, asked Salman Khurshid, who played the role of Amicus Curie in the matter, whether three divorces are merely a practice in Islam or is this an integral part of Islam? The Constitution Bench wanted to know if any such custom which is a crime can be a part of Shariat? The Supreme Court also asked Khurshid whether any crime can be considered as God’s will or it would be better to say it made by human beings. The judges asked that the practice of three divorced outside India is also prevailing? The court wanted to know how the practice was done in other countries? The court admitted that three divorces are ‘the worst’ and ‘undesirable’ way to eliminate the relationship between husband and wife in Islam. Although the Constitution Bench acknowledged that many of the Islamic ideologies regard it as justified.
Khursheed’s Answer
Khurshid told the court that divorces in view of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board are a scandalous but valid custom. Khurshid said that in his personal opinion three divorces are ‘sin’ and Islam can not permit any crime. In response to the Bench questions, Khurshid said that unlike the three divorces, Gunah can not be part of Shariat. He said that only three Muslims have been introduced in three divorces. Khurshid suggested that to say a divorce three times at once is considered to be a single divorced declaration. In his opinion, if three divorces are considered ‘one divorce’ then it will be easy to reverse it. Khurshid said that what is happening now in India has already happened in foreign countries. Due to this, the practice of three divorces has been abolished in many countries. Salman Khurshid said that according to Islamic law, the woman can put such a condition in the marriage, according to which she is allowed to say ‘no’ to the three divorces.
Point of hearing before the Supreme Court
These historical hearings in the Supreme Court are being held on petitions challenging the constitutional validity of three divorces and marriage halas. According to the court, he will first decide whether this practice is the fundamental part of Islam or not? If it is, can it be implemented under fundamental rights? The court has clarified that if the Constitution Benches reaches the conclusion that the three divorces are the fundamental part of Islam, then they will not consider the question of its constitutional validity. The bench will once again hear the petitioners’ debate. The parties, who are opposing these petitions will be hearing for the next two days. After this, both sides will get the answer for one day.
What happened in the first day’s hearing?
On the first day the Supreme Court had asked the Center that if the three divorces were declared unlawful, then what will be its next step? On the issue, the Center said that it is in favor of the basic rights of women and women of any one class can not be deprived of these rights. Advocating advocates of three divorced women, senior counsel Indira Jaysingh said that it is not enough for the central government to give statements in the right of women and in case the Parliament should intervene. In the case of Amicus Curie, that is, Justice Salman Khurshid said that without the effort of reconciliation, three divorces do not recognize Islamic law. His argument was that in Islamic law the responsibilities of both husband and wife are fixed. In his opinion, three divorce is not an issue because it belongs to the personal relationship of husband and wife. In the case, Kapil Sibal, who is lobbying for the personal law board, also supported Khurshid’s arguments.
