The apex court held that the triple talaq was against the basic tenets of Quran.
"In view of the different opinions recorded by a majority of 3:2, the practice of 'talaq-e-biddat' - triple talaq is set aside," a five-judge constitution bench said in a 395-page order.
While Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice S Abdul Nazeer were in favour of putting on hold for six months the practice of triple talaq and asking the government to come out with a law in this regard, Justices Kurian Joseph, R F Nariman and U U Lalit held it as violative of the Constitution.
The three judges also said the practice of divorce through triple talaq is manifestly arbitrary and violative of the Constitution and must be struck down.
The minority verdict by CJI Khehar and Justice Nazeer, which favoured keeping on hold the practise of triple talaq for six months, asked the political parties to set aside their differences and help the Centre in coming out with a legislation.
The judges in the minority verdict said that if the Centre does not bring a law within six months, then its injunction on triple talaq will continue.
The bench, made up of judges from different religious communities -- Sikh, Christian, Parsi, Hindu and Muslim, had heard seven pleas, including five separate petitions filed by Muslim women challenging the prevalent practice of 'triple talaq' in the community.
The petitioners had claimed that the practice of 'triple talaq' was unconstitutional.
The Muslim women, who had filed the petitions, had challenged the practice of 'triple talaq' in which the husband pronounces 'talaq' thrice in one go, sometimes even by phone or a text message, to get divorce.
The Centre had earlier told the bench that it will come out with a law to regulate marriage and divorce among Muslims if 'triple talaq' is held invalid and unconstitutional by the apex court.
The government had termed all the three forms of divorce among the Muslim community -- talaq-e-biddat, talaq hasan and talaq ahsan, as "unilateral" and "extra-judicial".
It has said that all personal laws must be in confirmity with the Constitution and rights of marriage, divorce, property and succession has to be treated in the same class and has to be in conformity with the Constitution.
The batch of pleas had also challenged the constitutional validity of other practices like 'nikah halala' and polygamy among Muslims.
The bench had taken up the main matter on its own as a petition titled "Muslim women's quest for equality".
The apex court had on its own taken cognizance of the question whether Muslim women faced gender discrimination in the event of divorce or due to other marriages of their husbands.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
