Updates on Triple Talaq Hearing from Supreme Court – Day 6.A vacation Bench of the Supreme Court continues to hear the challenge to the Islamic practices of Talaq-e-Biddat (Triple Talaq) and Nikah Halala this week..Here is a summary of the action from the Supreme Court as it happens:.The petitioners concluded their rejoinder arguments today, and the Court reserved judgment..The end of today’s hearing witnessed a rather unsavoury incident in court room 1..Yesterday, Attorney General Mukul Rohtagi made his rejoinder submissions. He argued that if any part of a religion goes against Part III of the Constitution, it ought to be done away with. Even as the Bench showed reluctance in interfering with the Legislature’s domain, Rohatgi insisted that is was necessary for them to step in..Senior Advocate Indira Jaising was next; she once again brought up the issue of Article 13, insisting that Islamic laws were ‘laws’ under the provision, and were therefore subject to Part III. Senior Advocates Raju Ramachandran and V Giri also made their submissions..Earlier this week, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), argued that the practice was not a matter of constitutionality, but one of faith. He also submitted that Shariat, being personal law, was outside the scope of fundamental rights..A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India JS Khehar, along with Justices Kurian Joseph, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Uday Umesh Lalit and Abdul Nazeer is hearing the case.
Updates on Triple Talaq Hearing from Supreme Court – Day 6.A vacation Bench of the Supreme Court continues to hear the challenge to the Islamic practices of Talaq-e-Biddat (Triple Talaq) and Nikah Halala this week..Here is a summary of the action from the Supreme Court as it happens:.The petitioners concluded their rejoinder arguments today, and the Court reserved judgment..The end of today’s hearing witnessed a rather unsavoury incident in court room 1..Yesterday, Attorney General Mukul Rohtagi made his rejoinder submissions. He argued that if any part of a religion goes against Part III of the Constitution, it ought to be done away with. Even as the Bench showed reluctance in interfering with the Legislature’s domain, Rohatgi insisted that is was necessary for them to step in..Senior Advocate Indira Jaising was next; she once again brought up the issue of Article 13, insisting that Islamic laws were ‘laws’ under the provision, and were therefore subject to Part III. Senior Advocates Raju Ramachandran and V Giri also made their submissions..Earlier this week, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), argued that the practice was not a matter of constitutionality, but one of faith. He also submitted that Shariat, being personal law, was outside the scope of fundamental rights..A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India JS Khehar, along with Justices Kurian Joseph, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Uday Umesh Lalit and Abdul Nazeer is hearing the case.
