Talaq-e-Hasan row: Supreme Court seeks Centre's response on plea challenging Muslim divorce practices

The Supreme Court asked the Centre and other authorities to respond to a petition seeking uniform procedural safeguards for every form of talaq under Muslim personal law. The plea says divorce procedures should provide fairness, reconciliation, transparency and protection for women’s fundamental rights. It also challenges the validity of Talaq-e-Hasan.

The petition asks authorities to declare Talaq-e-Hasan and other unilateral extra-judicial forms of talaq an evil that should be banned. It seeks economic and social protection for divorced women and their children, both retrospectively and in the future. It also challenges Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, to the extent that it recognises Talaq-e-Hasan.

The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, tagged the case with another pending challenge. That separate plea was filed by a Muslim woman contesting Talaq-e-Hasan pronounced by her husband. The case could lead to broader divorce safeguards.

Talaq-e-Hasan is a form of divorce under Muslim personal law in which a Muslim man pronounces the word “talaq” once a month over three months. The process is spread out rather than completed through one immediate pronouncement. This timing creates an interval during which the marriage may continue or reconciliation may occur.

The divorce formalises after the third utterance in the third month if cohabitation has not resumed. The key mechanism is therefore repeated pronouncement combined with a waiting period. The article states that the process can stop if the couple resumes living together after the first or second utterance.

The Supreme Court is considering a petition that challenges the validity of Talaq-e-Hasan. The plea seeks uniform, legally enforceable safeguards for all forms of talaq. It argues that divorce procedures should protect equality, dignity, fairness and the fundamental rights of women under Articles 14, 15 and 21.

Under Talaq-e-Hasan, the word “talaq” is pronounced once a month. The required number is three pronouncements, and the process takes place over three months. The article describes this as a staged form of divorce under Muslim personal law.

The third pronouncement is the decisive point described in the article. If the couple has not resumed cohabitation during the three-month period, the divorce becomes formal after the third utterance in the third month. Thus, both the number of pronouncements and the passage of time matter.

The arrangement also leaves room for reconciliation before the process ends. If cohabitation resumes after the first or second pronouncement, the parties are assumed to have reconciled. A current petition challenges this process and seeks uniform safeguards, including fairness, transparency and protection for women and children affected by divorce.

If the couple resumes cohabitation after the first or second utterance of “talaq,” the parties are assumed to have reconciled. This means the staged divorce process does not proceed as though the earlier pronouncement alone had ended the marriage. The article presents resumed cohabitation as the point that interrupts the process.

For example, a first pronouncement may occur in one month, followed by the couple living together again. In that situation, the article says reconciliation is assumed. The same applies if cohabitation resumes after the second pronouncement. The third utterance matters only when cohabitation has not resumed during the three-month period.

This reconciliation feature is part of the process being challenged in the Supreme Court. The fresh petition seeks uniform procedural safeguards for all forms of talaq. It also asks for protection for divorced women and their children, along with rules promoting fairness, transparency and constitutional rights.

The article distinguishes Talaq-e-Hasan by describing it as a process spread over three months. A Muslim man pronounces “talaq” once each month, and the divorce formalises after the third utterance if cohabitation has not resumed. Reconciliation can occur after the first or second utterance.

Triple talaq is identified as another form of divorce prevalent among the Muslim community. Unlike Talaq-e-Hasan, the article does not explain triple talaq’s detailed procedure. It does state that the Supreme Court declared triple talaq unconstitutional in 2017 after finding it arbitrary and violative of women’s fundamental rights.

The current petition asks the Court and authorities to examine Talaq-e-Hasan and other unilateral extra-judicial forms of talaq. It seeks a declaration that these practices should be banned, plus uniform procedural safeguards. The petition also challenges the legal recognition of Talaq-e-Hasan under Section 2 of the 1937 Act.

The petition argues that Talaq-e-Hasan and other unilateral extra-judicial divorces may violate constitutional protections because they can place decisive power in one spouse’s hands. It asks for procedures that ensure fairness, reconciliation, transparency and protection of women’s fundamental rights. The petition describes these forms of talaq as arbitrary and seeks stronger safeguards.

The relevant constitutional provisions are Article 14, equality before the law; Article 15, prohibition of discrimination on grounds including religion and sex; and Article 21, protection of life and personal liberty. The petition says divorce practices should be assessed against these guarantees rather than operate without uniform legal safeguards.

It also seeks adequate economic and social protection for divorced women and their children, retrospectively and on an ongoing basis. The petition asks the Centre to create gender-just and religion-neutral procedures for ending marriages, including marriages governed by personal laws. The Supreme Court has sought responses from the Centre and other authorities.

Muslim personal law generally refers to rules and practices governing family matters for Muslims, including marriage and divorce. The article discusses talaq and polygamy as practices connected with Muslim personal law. It also refers to Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, which the petition challenges regarding Talaq-e-Hasan.

Courts can assess a personal-law practice by asking whether it treats people equally, discriminates on prohibited grounds, or harms life and personal liberty. Those questions correspond to Articles 14, 15 and 21. In this case, the petition argues that unilateral divorce and unregulated polygamy may lack equality, dignity, informed consent, financial security and constitutional protection.

The article does not provide a complete legal test for reviewing personal law. It does show what the petition seeks: gender-just, religion-neutral and enforceable safeguards for dissolving marriages. The Supreme Court has sought responses before considering the challenges, and it tagged this petition with another Talaq-e-Hasan case.