<p>The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to consider a plea questioning validity of 'Talaq-e-Hasan', which allowed a Muslim man to divorce his wife by pronouncing "talaq" once a month for three months, and all other forms of unilateral extra-judicial talaq. </p>.<p>A vacation bench of Justices A S Bopanna and Vikram Nath allowed a plea for urgent hearing made by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay on behalf of the petitioner.</p>.<p>He said the aggrieved lady and a child would be left without a remedy if no intervention was made. The first notice was given on April 19 and the second notice was issued on May 19. After a third notice, the process for divorce would be complete, and the woman would be left with an option of 'Halala' to resume her marriage, he said.</p>.<p>The court agreed to hear the matter on Friday.</p>.<p>The petition has been filed by advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey on behalf of a Ghaziabad resident, Benazeer Heena, who claimed to be a victim of “unilateral extra-judicial Talaq-e-Hasan”. </p>.<p>The plea sought a declaration of the practice as void and unconstitutional for being arbitrary, irrational, and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. </p>.<p>In Talaq-e-Hasan, talaq is pronounced once a month, over a period of three months. If cohabitation is not resumed during this period, divorce gets formalised after the third utterance in the third month. However, if cohabitation resumes after the first or second utterance of talaq, the parties are assumed to have reconciled. The first/second utterances of talaq are deemed invalid. </p>.<p>The petitioner, who claimed to have been given such a divorce, contended that the police and authorities had told her that Talaq-e-Hasan is permitted under Sharia. </p>.<p>“The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, conveys a wrong impression that the law sanctions Talaq-E-Hasan and all other forms of unilateral extra-judicial talaq, which is grossly injurious to the fundamental rights of married Muslim women and offends Articles 14, 15, 21 and 25 of the Constitution of India and the international conventions on civil and human rights,” her plea said.</p>.<p>It further pointed out, many Islamic nations have restricted such a practice, while it continues to vex the Indian society in general and Muslim women like the petitioner in particular. </p>.<p>The practice also wreaks havoc to lives of many women and their children, especially those belonging to the weaker economic sections of the society, it added.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to consider a plea questioning validity of 'Talaq-e-Hasan', which allowed a Muslim man to divorce his wife by pronouncing "talaq" once a month for three months, and all other forms of unilateral extra-judicial talaq. </p>.<p>A vacation bench of Justices A S Bopanna and Vikram Nath allowed a plea for urgent hearing made by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay on behalf of the petitioner.</p>.<p>He said the aggrieved lady and a child would be left without a remedy if no intervention was made. The first notice was given on April 19 and the second notice was issued on May 19. After a third notice, the process for divorce would be complete, and the woman would be left with an option of 'Halala' to resume her marriage, he said.</p>.<p>The court agreed to hear the matter on Friday.</p>.<p>The petition has been filed by advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey on behalf of a Ghaziabad resident, Benazeer Heena, who claimed to be a victim of “unilateral extra-judicial Talaq-e-Hasan”. </p>.<p>The plea sought a declaration of the practice as void and unconstitutional for being arbitrary, irrational, and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. </p>.<p>In Talaq-e-Hasan, talaq is pronounced once a month, over a period of three months. If cohabitation is not resumed during this period, divorce gets formalised after the third utterance in the third month. However, if cohabitation resumes after the first or second utterance of talaq, the parties are assumed to have reconciled. The first/second utterances of talaq are deemed invalid. </p>.<p>The petitioner, who claimed to have been given such a divorce, contended that the police and authorities had told her that Talaq-e-Hasan is permitted under Sharia. </p>.<p>“The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, conveys a wrong impression that the law sanctions Talaq-E-Hasan and all other forms of unilateral extra-judicial talaq, which is grossly injurious to the fundamental rights of married Muslim women and offends Articles 14, 15, 21 and 25 of the Constitution of India and the international conventions on civil and human rights,” her plea said.</p>.<p>It further pointed out, many Islamic nations have restricted such a practice, while it continues to vex the Indian society in general and Muslim women like the petitioner in particular. </p>.<p>The practice also wreaks havoc to lives of many women and their children, especially those belonging to the weaker economic sections of the society, it added.</p>
