Kamal Ghorui
NEW DELHI: In an unprecedented step, Supreme Court put on hold an advocate’s two attempts to divorce his wife through talaq-e-hasan and sent them to mediation for an amicable settlement of their marital dispute even though the man had remarried after the first talaq-e-hasan in 2022.Amid duelling interpretations of Shariat, Muslim personal law and its religious connotations between senior advocates Rizwan Ahmed – appearing for the woman, Benazeer Heena – and M R Shamshad – appearing for the man, Yusuf Naqi – a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi persuaded the parties to go for mediation.The advocate had first given talaq-e-hasan (pronouncement of talaq three times, each separated from the other by a month) first in 2022. However, on a petition by Heena where she challenged the validity of talaq-e-hasan, which she said left Muslim women destitute as there was no provision for maintenance, SC noted that it was handed over to her thro-ugh her husband’s counsel.Heena said she could not remarry as she did not have a valid divorce under Muslim personal law. When Shamshad said his client had given her a valid divorce, Ahmed contested this and termed the second round illegal.The bench said, “There is an urgent and dire necessity to refer parties to mediation for amicable resolution of their marital disputes and whether talaq-e-hasan was given validly and to explore any alternative solution.”It referred the parties for mediation before former SC judge Kurian Joseph, who incidentally was with the majority verdict by a five-judge Constitution bench that declared instant triple talaq unconstitutional in the Shayara Bano case on Aug 22, 2017.In another petition filed by Delhi-based Aasma questioning the validity of talaq-e-hasan given to her, the bench found that her husband, Mohd Anshar, had not responded to the court’s notice seeking a response. It directed the SHO of Karawal Nagar to produce Anshar at the next hearing.After SC passed the two orders, Shamshad said it should not give the impression that talaq-e-hasan was an invalid mode of divorce among Muslims. The bench said it had expressed no opinion on the validity of talaq-e-hasan and that it was facilitating exploration of the possibility of an amicable settlement.
