The Indian government has labelled the practice of 'triple talaq' as detrimental to the institution of marriage and harmful to Muslim women’s conditions in an affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court on Monday.
The government’s affidavit argues that despite the Supreme Court’s 2017 decision to invalidate 'triple talaq'—a practice previously accepted within some Muslim communities—this legal action has not significantly reduced its occurrence.
The government contends that the continued prevalence of 'triple talaq' highlights a pressing need for stricter legal measures to protect affected women.
“Victims of 'triple talaq' often have no choice but to seek police intervention, only to find that the police are powerless to act due to the absence of punitive legal provisions,” the affidavit states.
This submission comes in response to a petition challenging the constitutionality of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.
The petition, filed earlier this month by the Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema—a group of prominent Sunni scholars—argues that the Act is unconstitutional. It claims that the law infringes on fundamental rights, including equality before the law and non-discrimination on religious grounds.
The government’s detailed rebuttal, made public today, rejects these claims and asserts that the Act is essential for safeguarding the rights of Muslim women subjected to 'triple talaq.'
It argues that the Act aligns with the constitutional goals of gender justice and equality. “The Parliament enacted this law to protect married Muslim women from the adverse effects of 'triple talaq,' ensuring their fundamental rights are upheld,” the affidavit reads.
The government also underscores that it is beyond the Supreme Court’s purview to question the wisdom of laws passed by Parliament. “It is solely the legislature’s responsibility to determine the appropriateness of laws and the extent of their implementation,” the affidavit argues.
“Decisions on whether a specific conduct should be criminalised and the nature of its punishment fall within the legislative domain, guided by the prevailing social context,” it says.
The Supreme Court had previously ruled that it could not delve into the legislative process or dictate the content of laws.
The government’s stance reinforces the notion that legislative bodies are best positioned to address social issues through the creation and adjustment of laws.
Follow us
