Arup Kumar Goswami, J.

Heard Ms. S.P. Hussain, learned Legal Aid Counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Y.S. Mannan, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 4, Mr. M. Rahman, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3. Mr. R.C. Borpatragohain, learned Advocate General, Assam, who was requested by the Court to address, is also heard. He is assisted by Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned State counsel.

2. This writ petition is filed questioning the process of talak initiated by respondent No. 3 and for directing the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to cancel, recall or otherwise forbear from giving effect to the impugned registration of talak.

3. The respondent No. 2 is the Registrar-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup and respondent No. 3 is the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Registrar, Hatigaon for the district of Kamrup.

4. At the outset, facts relevant for the purpose of this case, as stated in the writ petition, may be, briefly, noticed:

The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 was solemnized on 21.03.2015 according to Islamic Shariat at Guwahati. From the beginning of the marital life, the petitioner had been subjected to mental and physical torture by respondent No. 4. After she conceived in the month of April, 2015, she was forced to leave her matrimonial home and during the period of pregnancy, she was not taken care of. She finally gave birth to a male child in the month of January, 2016. After about 15 days of her release from the hospital, petitioner's brother had taken her and the baby to her matrimonial home. Physical torture continued and on 17.02.2017, she went to her parental home for performance of some religious rituals as well as for vaccination of the baby. When she returned back to her matrimonial home, the respondent No. 4 did not allow her to enter the house and drove her away as a result of which she had to come back to her parental house. The petitioner received a notice dated 20.02.2016 from the office of respondent No. 3 under his seal asking the petitioner to appear in his office on 29.02.2016. As the petitioner was advised complete bed rest because of bleeding, the brother of the petitioner went to the office of the respondent No. 3 and submitted an application stating the physical condition of the petitioner and her inability to appear before him. The petitioner received another notice asking her to appear on 12.03.2016 on the basis of the application submitted by the brother of the petitioner on 29.02.2016. The petitioner had submitted a medical certificate through her brother on 16.03.2016, i.e. after the date fixed by respondent No. 3 was over. The petitioner also filed a suit for restoration of conjugal rights before the Family Court which was registered as F.C. (Civil) No. 207/2016. She also filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.PC. for grant of maintenance before the Family Court on 05.05.2016. The petitioner submitted an application on 18.03.2016 to the respondent No. 3 along with a copy of the order dated 16.03.2016 of the Family Court. While the matter rested at that, the petitioner received a notice of second Talaknama issued by respondent No. 3 in the month of April, 2016. From the written statement submitted by respondent No. 4 in F.C. (Civil) No. 207/2016, the petitioner learnt that in the month of June 2016, the respondent No. 4 had pronounced third and final talk on 17.06.2016 and that the said talak had been registered in the office of the respondent No. 3 as per Sections 6 and 11 of the Assam Muslim Marriages and Divorces Registration Act, 1935 (for short, "the 1935 Act").

5. In the affidavit, the respondent No. 3 stated that as the writ petitioner did not come to his office on 12.03.2016 in terms of the notice dated 01.03.2016, the respondent No. 4 decided to divorce his wife and submitted first talak in his office on 14.03.2016 and a copy of the Talaknama along with a notice were sent to the writ petitioner on 15.03.2016. It is further pleaded that the