SC comes to rescue of Muslim Man desirous of giving Talaq to Wife: Only Tripple Talaq is illegal, Read Order

The Supreme Court has jumped to the rescue of a Muslim Man who sought anticipatory bail with contention that not all forms of Talaq are unconstitutional, but only 'Triple Talaq.'

The Division Bench comprising of Justice Sanjeev Khanna and Justice Bela M. Trivedi observed that High Court overlooked the aspect in the impugned order that only Talak-ul-biddat is a criminal offence while Talak ahasan and Talak hasan have not been declared as unconstitutional, illegal or made an criminal offence.

The Court though have not stayed the proceedings under Section 125 of the CrPC or any other proceedings but made clear that the petitioner would not be arrested subject to his joining and cooperating in the investigation.

In plea before the High Court, it was submitted that the averments made in the F.I.R. do not constitute any offence punishable under Section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 as the Talaq was pronounced on 21.06.2021, on 25.07.20201 as mentioned in the anticipatory bail application but the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it has wrongly been printed as 25.07.20201 but it should be read as 25.07.2021 and on 25.08.2021, hence, the three Talaqs were not given simultaneously.

Pointing that Section 2 (c) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 defines Talaq as- “talaq” means talaq-e-biddat or any other similar form of talaq having the effect of instantaneous and irrevocable divorce pronounced by a Muslim husband, it was further submitted that the Talaq between the petitioner and the informant was not talaq-e-biddat.

Therefore, the privilege of anticipatory bail was pleaded. The High Court, however denied the same, in the impugned order:

"Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the requirement of his custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above named petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail."

Read Supreme Court Order Here:

Read High Court Order Here:

Picture Source :