Supreme Court reserves verdict over Triple Talaq Case

Supreme Court reserves verdict over Triple Talaq Case

The personal law board has said that the harmonising effect can not be done by the court and should not be done by the court. "I have said that if something is a part of personal law, then neither legislation nor courts can interfere", Khurshid told the media here.

With the hearing in the Supreme Court on the controversial practice of Triple Talaq is underway, The All India Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on Thursday refrained itself from commenting on the issue.

'I personally find triple talaq sinful. Here the Court is called to decide in a legal vacuum.

Justice Kurian Joseph, one of the judges on the bench, asked, prompting Sibal to seek a week's time for the Urdu draft to be translated into English.

"Yes, you should not hear", replied Sibal. He said it was not the domain of the court to declare the practice illegal or unconstitutional. He argued, "In the past, whenever Courts have decided on matters of faith, there was a law enacted by Parliament/State Legislature, an Ordinance or an executive order before it".

The bench also questioned the AIMPLB on the position of e-divorce given on WhatsApp in Islam. The submission came just before the hearing on the Constitutional validity of triple talaq.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday wondered how the Muslim community could claim it was fundamental to the religion when they themselves admitted it was "sinful" and "worst form of divorce".

Earlier in the hearing, the apex court refused to hear all the three cases of Polygamy, Nikah and Halala at once, saying it will focus on one matter at a time.

Chief Justice of India (CJI) J S Khehar himself, who heads the five-man constitution bench, pointed out that the practice is a deviation from the right path. Senior advocate Salman Khurshid briefed the hearing of the Supreme Court and said today was the final day for the replies to be given by those who felt that they had something in response to suggest whatever arguments were made by the opposition. Anything sinful could not have been ordained by Islam and be made part of shariat, ' Khurshid had said. "Substantiating my view with reasons and examples, I asserted that it can not be justified and can not be given law's validation", Khurshid said during the hearing.

Senior Advocate Amit Singh Chadha, appearing for Shayara Bano, one of the victims of triple talaq, started rebuttal arguments quoting AIMPLB's stand that this is sinful and patriarchal practice and said this can not be integral to Islam. In his concluding arguments on behalf of the board, Sibal cautioned the apex court not to take the "dangerous and slippery slope".

While AIMPLB was adamant that Muslim personal law practices could not be tested for its validity by courts, the petitioners were adamant that triple talaq was a blot on the Muslim community for denying right to equality to women.