Merely because triple talaq is void & illegal, doesn't mean it could not have been criminalized: Delhi HC forms prima facie opinion

The Delhi High Court has formed a prima facie view that merely because triple talaq has been declared to be void and illegal, it does not mean that the legislature could not have made the continuation of such practice an offence. (Nadeem Khan vs UOI).An order to this effect was passed by a Division Bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Rajnish Bhatnagar. .The Court was dealing with a plea seeking a declaration that Section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 was void ab initio, ultra vires, unconstitutional, discriminatory and violative to the fundamental rights of Muslim men including the Petitioner, Nadeem Khan..The section criminalizes the act of pronouncement of triple talaq by a Muslim husband. .The Petitioner also sought a direction to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, restraining him from registering FIRs alleging the commission of an offence under Section 4 during the pendency of the writ petition..The counsel for the Petitioner submitted that once triple talaq had been rendered void and illegal, there was no justification for criminalizing the pronouncement of triple talaq. .Since such triple talaq would have no legal effect on the status of the Muslim marriage or have any other consequence, there was no purpose of penalising the act, it was contended. .Noticing that petition was not in the nature of a PIL, the Court refused to grant any general relief in respect of all cases involving Section 4, at this stage. .The Court further opined that since the issue of constitutionality was pending consideration before the Supreme Court, it would await the judgment before proceeding in the matter..Breaking: Supreme Court issues notice in challenge to criminalisation of Triple Talaq.It nonetheless observed that a legislation is presumed to be valid, unless it is declared to be invalid, or unconstitutional by a competent court, and is struck down..The Court stated that prima facie, it appeared that the object of Section 4 was to discourage the age old and traditional practice of pronouncement of talaq by a Muslim husband upon his wife by resort to talaq-e-biddat i.e. triple talaq..The purpose of Section 4 appears to be to provide a deterrent against such practice. Merely because triple talaq has been declared to be void and illegal, it does not mean that the legislature could not have made the continuation of such practice an offence. This is our prima facie view.Delhi High Court said. .Drawing parallel from Article 145(3) of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner had also prayed that since the matter involved a substantial question of law, it should be placed before a larger Bench. .In response, the Court ruled, ."We reject this submission. Admittedly, there is no provision either in the Constitution, or in any other law brought to our notice, which requires us to place the matter before a Larger Bench at this stage. As per roster fixed by Hon’ble the Chief Justice, the present petition has been placed before us to examine the validity of the provisions under challenge..(Reliance on) Delhi High Court Rules..is absolutely misplaced.".The petition was adjourned sine die with liberty to the parties to move an application as and when the decision of the Supreme Court is rendered..Triple Talaq: Delhi Court grants husband interim protection from arrest.Advocates Tarun Chandiok, Naseem Ahmed appeared for Petitioner. .Standing Counsel Kirtiman Singh with Advocates Sehaj Garg, Amit Gupta appeared for Centre. .Standing Counsel Rahul Mehra with Advocate Chaitanya Gosain appeared for Delhi Govt. .Read the Order: