IMPORTANT POINT
Triple Talaq is a cruel and the most demeaning form of divorce practised by the Muslim community.

Suneet Kumar, J.—Petitioners claim to have married as per muslim custom under personal law. First petitioner, i.e. the lady is aged about 23 years, whereas, second petitioner is aged about 53 years; both are illiterate. The document in support of their age is the Aadhar card. Both the petitioners are present in the Court, and have been identified by their counsel. In para-11 of the petition, it is averred that the second petitioner has contracted the present marriage after effecting instant talak (Triple Talaq) to his wife. The second petitioner admits before the Court that from his first marriage, he has two minor children, one residing with the wife and other with him. On a specific query as to when and why the instant divorce was effected, the second petitioner would state that to contract second marriage he has divorced his wife, no other reason is pleaded or stated before the Court.

2. The petitioners seek a direction to restrain the respondent police authorities and the third respondent, who is the mother of the lady from harassing them, further, to ensure security and safety of the petitioners and in particular to the first petitioner. It is alleged that the respondents are harassing the petitioners living as man and woman.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners are adult and are at liberty to choose their own partner on attaining age of majority within social framework of the society and the country, therefore, the petitioners cannot be deprived of their life and personal liberty except in accordance with the procedure established by law under Article 21 of the Constitution.

4. There can be no dispute to the proposition that is being advanced by learned counsel, nor difference in age is an issue, what is disturbing is that the instrument of instant divorce (Triple Talaq), in the facts of the present case, has been used for ulterior purpose for divorcing the wife. It is not being disputed that the first petitioner used to visit Mohalla, Tehsil Rokan Sarai, District Bulandshahar, where she met the second petitioner and fell in love, thereafter, decided to marry. First petitioner left her family and joined the company of second petitioner, consequently, the second petitioner decided to get rid of his first wife by divorcing her by pronouncing instant talaq.

5. The question which disturbs the Court is should muslim wives suffer this tyranny for all times? Should their personal law remain so cruel towards these unfortunate wives? Whether the personal law can be amended suitably to alleviate their sufferings? The judicial conscience is disturbed at this monstrosity. The first wife has to live life for no fault of her but for the reason that her husband got attracted to a lady half of her age which is the reason for being divorced. The view that the Muslim husband enjoys an arbitrary, unilateral power to inflict instant divorce does not accord with Islamic injunctions. It is a popular fallacy that a Muslim male enjoys, under the Quaranic Law, unbridled authority to liquidate the marriage. The whole Quoran expressly forbids a man to seek pretexts for divorcing his wife, so long as she remains faithful and obedient to him. The Islamic law gives to the man primarily the faculty of dissolving the marriage, if the wife, by her indocility or her bad character, renders the married life unhappy; but in the absence of serious reasons, no man can justify a divorce, either in the eye of religion or the law. If he abandons his wife or puts her away in simple caprice, he draws upon himself the divine anger, for the curse of God, said the Prophet, rests on him who repudiates his wife capriciously. In other Islamic State, where the husband must satisfy the court about the reasons for divorce.

6. However, Muslim law, as applied in India, has taken a course contrary to the spirit of what the Prophet or the Holy Quoran laid down and the same misconception vitiates the law dealing with the wife’s right to div