Triple Talaq Judgement (2016)

Introduction

Shayara Bano, 35, took on the practice in 2016, a year after her 15-year-old husband divorced her via triple talaq.
Bano's petition was paired with those of four other Muslim women: Afreen Rehman, Gulshan Parveen, Ishrat Jahan, and Atiya Sabri.
Some Muslim organizations consider the issue as a question of religious freedom, while others, such as the Centre, see it as unconstitutional.

Rizwan Ahmed was Shayara Bano's husband for 15 years. He divorced her in 2016 with an instant triple talaq (talaq -e bidat). She asked the Supreme Court to declare three practices – talaq-e-bidat, polygamy, and nikah-halala – unlawful since they contradict Articles 14, 15, 21, and 25 of the Constitution.
On February 16, 2017, the Court requested written responses from Shayara Bano, the Union of India, several women's rights organisations, and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on the issues of talaq-e-bidat, nikah-halala, and polygamy.
Ms Bano's claim that these practices are unlawful was endorsed by the Union of India and women's rights organisations such as Bebaak Collective and Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan (BMMA).
The AIMPLB has maintained that uncodified Muslim personal law is not susceptible to judicial examination under the Constitution, and that these are vital Islamic religious traditions protected under Article 25 of the Constitution.
On March 30, 2017, the Apex Court convened a five-judge constitutional bench after accepting Shayara Bano's appeal. The first hearing took place on May 11th, 2017.
The 5 Judge Bench issued its judgement in the Triple Talaq Case on August 22, 2017, pronouncing the practice unlawful by a 3:2 majority.

The practice of talaq-e-bidat allows a man to divorce his wife by saying 'talaq' three times in one sitting without his wife's agreement.
Nikah Halala is a Muslim custom in which a divorced woman who wishes to remarry her spouse must first marry and divorce a second husband before returning to her first husband.
Polygamy is the practice of allowing Muslim men to have many wives.

The Supreme Court brought down this verdict on August 22, 2017 in 3:2 majority holding the practice of Triple Talaq illegal.
The state cannot take away a person's vital religious practice under Article 25 of the Constitution. As a result, if a practice is arbitrary and not an essential religious practice, it will fall under the u/a 25 exception. As a result, the entire debate revolved around whether or not the practice is an essential Islamic religious practice.
As a result, the majority ruled that the Triple Talaq is not covered by the exception set forth in Article 25, i.e., the court determined that the practice is not an integral part of Islam.
Although it is practiced by the Hanafi School, the court supported its position by stating that it is regarded wicked in Islam. Triple Talaq goes against the Quran's essential doctrines, and anything that goes against the Quran goes against Shariat. As a result, what is evil in theology cannot be good in law.
The majority bench cited its prior ruling Shamim Ara, which concluded that the practice of Triple Talaq is against both theology and law, and that it cannot be approved simply because it is practiced by a vast number of persons.
As a result, such behaviour is ruled unlawful and prohibited.

After numerous failed attempts, Shayara Bano, Ishrat Jahan, Aafreen Rehman, and Gulshan Parveen filed a petition that was successful in giving justice to many silenced voices in India.
The majority ruling restored the common people's faith in the judicial system.
The ruling demonstrated that democratic ideals such as equality, liberty, and so on would not be thwarted by any philosophy, even if it were a religion. Women who have been victims of Triple Talaq have now received justice in the courts.
By virtue of Triple Talaq, men used to forsake women readily after enjoying and extracting pleasure from them.
The circumstances has altered after the verdict was handed down, making such instances impossible.
No longer can a husband desert his wife by breaking the marital ties based on his whims and fancies.
The court determined that equality, particularly gender equality, is not merely a theoretical notion.
The nation, on the other hand, is concerned about the minority bench's viewpoint. If the Chief Justice of India prioritises practises like Triple Talaq while ignoring widespread crimes, the apex court's judges ought to reconsider their positions.