Triple talaq: India considers jail for & # 39; instant divorce & # 39; –

Triple talaq: India considers jail for & # 39; instant divorce & # 39;


  Muslim brides, veiled in red, speak during a mbadive wedding ceremony in 2015 Copyright image
Getty Images


Divorce by a man who says "talaq "Three times it was declared illegal in August

Spouses seeking an "instant divorce" could be sentenced to three years in prison under a bill that is being considered in India.

The traditional practice involves a Muslim who says "talaq" (divorce) three times – in any form, including email or text message.

It was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of India in August, but officials say it has continued since then.

The proposed law also provides for fines and support for affected women.

The project The bill on the protection of women's rights has been sent to regional governments for consultation.

It would explicitly forbid the "triple talaq", in accordance with the Supreme Court ruling, and would establish legal procedures for a "subsistence allowance" and custody arrangements, said Press Trust of India.

Media playback not supported on your device

Media legend Triple talaq: Why I fought against instant divorce

Those provisions have been angry and "to ensure that, in case the husband ask the wife to leave the house, should have legal protection, "quoted a senior official saying

According to the current draft, people suspected of the offense would not be eligible for bail.

It would also prohibit practice in any form, including in writing, or by text message.

  • How Muslim women fought and won, divorce battle
  • Women who sleep with a stranger to save their marriage

Indian media said legislation should be considered during winter parliamentary sessions, which begin in mid-December.

Muslims are the largest minority group in India, and it is one of the few countries where the practice of triple talaq, which has no basis in the Koran, has survived.

The Supreme Court ruling came after five women filed lawsuits with the court, alleging that the traditional practice violated their fundamental rights.

The court ruled 3-2 in its favor, and labeled it "non-Isl" amic. "

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.