SC to examine constitutional validity of polygamy, 'nikah halala' among Muslims

Agencies
March 26, 2018

New Delhi, Mar 26: The Supreme Court of India today agreed to examine the constitutional validity of the practices of polygamy and 'nikah halala' among the Muslims and sought responses from the Centre and the Law Commission.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra considered the submission that an earlier five-judge constitution bench, in its 2017 verdict, had kept open the issue of polygamy and 'nikah halala' while quashing triple talaq.

Today, the bench, which also comprised Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud, said a fresh five-judge constitution bench would be set up to deal with the constitutionality of 'nikah halala' and polygamy.

While polygamy allows a Muslim man to have four wives, 'nikah halala' deals with the process in which a Muslim woman has to marry another person and get divorced from him before being allowed to marry her divorcee husband again.

By a majority of 3:2, a five-judge constitution bench had earlier held triple talaq as unconstitutional in its judgement last year.

The bench was hearing at least three petitions including some PILs challenging the practices on various grounds including that they violate Right to Equality and gender justice.

Delhi BJP leader Aswini Kumar Upadhyay, who filed a PIL on March 5, claimed that the ban on polygamy and 'nikah-halala' was the need of the hour to secure basic rights.

The harm caused to the women due to the practices of triple talaq, polygamy and 'nikah-halala' is violative of Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution and injurious to public order, morality and health, Upadhyay's petition said.

He sought a declaration "that the provisions of the IPC are applicable on all Indian citizens and triple talaq is a cruelty under section 498A (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) of the IPC, 'nikah-halala' is rape under section 375 (rape) of the IPC, and polygamy is an offence under section 494 (marrying again during lifetime of husband or wife) of the IPC."

On March 14, a Delhi-based woman, had moved the apex court saying that by virtue of Muslim Personal Law, section 494 of IPC (marrying again during lifetime of husband or wife) was rendered inapplicable to this community and no married Muslim woman has the avenue of filing a complaint against her husband for the offence of bigamy.

She sought to declare the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 25 (freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion) of the Constitution in so far as it fails to secure for Indian Muslim women the protection from bigamy which has been statutorily secured for women in India belonging to other religions.

The petitioner, who herself claimed to be a victim of such practices, has alleged that her husband and his family used to torture her for want of more dowry and she was ousted from the matrimonial home twice.

She also alleged that her husband had married another woman without taking any legal divorce from her and the police had refused to lodge FIR under section 494 and 498A (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) of the IPC stating that polygamy was permitted under the Sharia.

Later on March 18, a Hyderabad-based lawyer, had also challenged the practice of polygamy, claiming that all these types of marriages under the Muslim personal law violate the fundamental rights of Muslim women.

The petition has contended that while the Muslim law allows a man to have multiple wives by way of the temporary marriages or polygamy, same permission is not extended to women.

The petition has opposed the practice of Nikah Halala, where a divorced woman has to remarry and then get a talaq before being able to marry her first husband, as well as Nikah Mutah and Nikah Misyar -- both temporary marriages where duration of the relationship is specified and agreed upon in advance.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 12,2024

blastsuspects.jpg

Bengaluru, Apr 12: The two men who allegedly plotted and executed the blast that rocked Rameshwaram Cafe in Bengaluru last month have been arrested from Kanthi in Bengal's East Midnapore district, the National Investigation Agency said Friday morning. 

Mussavir Hussain Shazeb and Abdul Matheen Taha were caught after a joint operation by central intelligence agencies and police from Bengal, Karnataka, Telangana, and Kerala, and are en route to Kolkata, the anti-terror agency said in a statement.

The available evidence indicates Shazeb planted the explosive device, placed inside a backpack, at the popular eatery. Taha was responsible for planning the attack and for their disappearance.

These are the second and third arrests in this case; last month Muzammil Shareef, who extended logistical support to the Shazeb and Taha, was taken into custody.

Residents of Karnataka's Shivamogga district, Shazeb and Taha were traced to Kanthi after officials conducted searches at 18 locations across Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, and even Uttar Pradesh.

The blast at Bengaluru's Rameshwaram Cafe on March 1 injured 10 people, customers and staff.

Fortunately there were no deaths; the bag containing the explosives was placed in a relatively less crowded area and against a large pillar that absorbed the brunt of the explosion.

After the blast, the NIA released photos and videos of the accused, as seen on CCTV cameras across Bengaluru. In one such clip, the accused - wearing a face mask - was seen boarding a bus.

The agency had declared a reward of ₹ 10 lakh for information leading to the arrest of each accused. The agency had also questioned their acquaintances, including college and school friends.

The Rameshwaram Cafe, which suffered extensive damage after the blast, reopened eight days later, with enhanced security measures including metal detectors.

BJP’s reaction

The Karnataka BJP on Friday attacked the Siddaramaiah government after the arrest of two men by the NIA in the Bengaluru cafe blast case, saying that the terrorists were 'brothers' of the Congress.

Taking to social media, Karnataka BJP stated, “National Investigation Agency (NIA) detains ‘Brothers’ of Congress in Rameshwaram Blast case. Ever since Jihadi Tipu Sultan’s admirers came to power in Karnataka, terrorists have got a free ride.”

“Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s ‘Ease of Doing Terror’ Policies have prompted ISIS to now set up its shop in Karnataka. The only guarantee that CM Siddaramaiah has fulfilled is converting prosperous Karnataka into a terror hub,” the BJP stated.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 24,2024

rahulgowda.jpg

Bengaluru: Former Prime Minister H D Deve Gowda on Wednesday slammed Rahul Gandhi’s "wealth redistribution promise", stating that only someone with no practical knowledge can speak like that.

 “He is dreaming of a revolution. By talking about wealth redistribution, Rahul Gandhi has insulted and humiliated two Congress Prime Ministers who brought market reforms and increased the wealth of the nation,” he added, recalling the contribution of P V Narasimha Rao and Manmohan Singh in economic liberalisation.

Accusing Gandhi of indirectly trying to say that what the two Congress Prime Ministers did was wrong, Gowda said, "He (Rahul Gandhi) has torn up their economic reforms like he had torn up an ordinance (which sought to overturn the rule that disqualifies convicted MPs and MLAs) issued by (the then) Manmohan Singh (government)."

The 90-year-old JD(S) supremo ridiculed the Congress manifesto claiming that only a party that is sure of never coming to power can make as many promises.

“The Congress has promised so many things in its manifesto. The only party that is very sure of never coming to power will promise so much,” Gowda said at a press conference here.

He said the Congress wants to turn this country 'upside down' and the promises made by it indicated that it wants to come to power 'at any cost'.

“Rahul Gandhi wants to do a wealth survey and distribute the wealth. Does he think he is a mass leader,” Deve Gowda said.

Picking up points from the Congress manifesto ‘Nyay Patra’, Gowda said Rahul Gandhi wants to 'give 30 lakh new central government jobs and run this country'.

“There are only 40 lakh sanctioned jobs. How can he create 30 lakh more jobs overnight? How much will he pay these people? Where will he employ them,” he asked.

“Only someone with no practical knowledge can speak like this. (P) Chidambaram was the manifesto committee chairman. Does he agree with Rahul Gandhi’s immature economic ideas,” Gowda said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 20,2024

Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, on Friday, said that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) plans to reintroduce electoral bonds in some capacity following extensive consultations with all stakeholders, should it come back to power in the 2024 general elections, according to a report in the Hindustan Times (HT).

HT cited Nirmala Sitharam as saying, “We still have to do a lot of consultation with stakeholders and see what is it that we have to do to make or bring in a framework which will be acceptable to all, primarily retain the level of transparency and completely remove the possibility of black money entering into this.”

However, the Centre has not yet decided whether to seek a review of the ruling made by the Supreme Court (SC), she said.

She further added, “What the scheme, which has been just thrown out by the Supreme Court, brought in was transparency. What prevailed earlier was just free-for-all.”

Launched in 2018, electoral bonds were accessible for acquisition at any State Bank of India (SBI) branch. Contributions made through this programme by corporations and even foreign entities via Indian subsidiaries received full tax exemption, while the identities of the donors remained confidential, safeguarded by both the bank and the recipient political parties.

On February 15, a five-judge Constitution Bench struck down the scheme, deeming it ‘unconstitutional’ due to its complete anonymisation of contributions to political parties. Additionally, the Bench stated that the articulated objectives of curbing black money or illegal election financing did not warrant disproportionately infringing upon voters’ right to information.

FM Sitharaman said, some aspects of the scheme need improvement and they will be brought back following consultations.

She also lashed out at the Opposition’s claims that the BJP disregarded criminal charges against leaders who switched from other parties to join the ruling party.

The HT quoted her as saying, “The BJP can’t sit here and say, you come to my party today, and the case will be closed tomorrow. The case has to go through the courts that have to take a call; they will not just say, “Oh, he’s come to your party, close the case.” Doesn’t happen that way. So is this washing machine a term they want to use for the courts?”

She further said that the Union government plans to simplify the process of taxation and make it easy for investments to come through into the country.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.