Skip to content
Gambling-trends — Understanding Our Family Dynamics — Find Serenity Now — learning

India’s Supreme Court Bans Instant Triple Talaq in Landmark Ruling

One woman’s fight against instant divorce changed India forever. How Shayara Bano’s case redefined justice for Muslim women—and set a bold legal precedent.

,   and  Administrator
2 min read
The image shows a woman in a white sari holding a microphone, surrounded by a group of people...
The image shows a woman in a white sari holding a microphone, surrounded by a group of people standing on the ground. In the background, we can see a metal fence, some plants in pots, a building with windows, a tree, and the sky. This image is likely related to the Supreme Court's decision to ban the use of women's rights in India.

India’s Supreme Court Bans Instant Triple Talaq in Landmark Ruling

On 22 August 2017, the Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark judgment in Shayara Bano v. Union of India & Others. By a 3:2 majority, the court struck down the practice of talaq-e-biddat—instant triple talaq—as unconstitutional. The ruling declared the practice arbitrary, discriminatory against Muslim women, and a violation of fundamental rights.

The case began when Shayara Bano, a Muslim woman, challenged her divorce pronounced through instant triple talaq. She argued that the practice breached her constitutional rights to equality, non-discrimination, and dignity.

Shayara Bano approached the Supreme Court after her husband divorced her using talaq-e-biddat, a form of instant divorce where a Muslim man could end his marriage by uttering 'talaq' three times in one sitting. Her petition contended that the practice violated Articles 14 (equality), 15 (non-discrimination), and 21 (right to life and dignity) of the Indian Constitution.

The respondents, including religious bodies, defended the practice. They claimed it was protected under Article 25, which guarantees freedom of religion, and argued that courts had no authority to review personal laws. However, the majority opinion rejected this stance, ruling that no religious practice could override constitutional values of equality and human dignity. The court’s majority held that talaq-e-biddat was unconstitutional under Article 14 because it was arbitrary and lacked legal justification. Justice Kurian Joseph went further, stating that the practice was impermissible even under Islamic law itself. The minority opinion, while upholding the practice in principle, temporarily suspended its operation and recommended parliamentary regulation. The verdict reignited debates on the balance between personal laws and constitutional rights. It also set a precedent for judicial scrutiny of discriminatory practices within religious communities, reinforcing the principle that fundamental rights apply to all citizens regardless of faith.

The Supreme Court’s decision marked a turning point for Muslim women’s rights in India. It abolished a practice that left many women vulnerable to sudden and irreversible divorce. The ruling also reaffirmed that constitutional guarantees of equality and dignity take precedence over any custom or tradition that undermines them.

Read also:

Related

Latest