Thu Nov 20 05:35:38 UTC 2025: Here’s a summary and a rewritten news article based on the provided text:
Summary:
The Supreme Court of India is considering whether to refer the challenge to the validity of “Talaq-e-Hasan,” a form of divorce in Islam, to a larger constitutional bench. This form of divorce allows a man to dissolve a marriage by pronouncing “talaq” once a month over three months. The court expressed concerns about the practice of husbands sending divorce notices through third parties (lawyers, etc.), questioning its compatibility with a modern and civilized society. The court acknowledged that while it’s not about striking down religious practices, it’s about ensuring they align with constitutional principles. The court is particularly concerned about the impact on vulnerable women who may not have the resources to fight for their rights and has asked for submissions on different forms of talaq and the issues to be adjudicated.
News Article:
Supreme Court Weighs Constitutionality of Talaq-e-Hasan, Questions Impact on Women
New Delhi, November 20, 2025 – The Supreme Court of India is deliberating whether to refer the challenge to the validity of “Talaq-e-Hasan,” a form of Islamic divorce, to a five-judge Constitution Bench. Talaq-e-Hasan allows a Muslim man to dissolve his marriage by pronouncing “talaq” once a month over a three-month period.
During a hearing on Wednesday, the bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan, and N. Kotiswar Singh raised serious concerns about the practice of husbands delegating the divorce notification to third parties, often lawyers, and deprecated such practices. “Should a civilized modern society allow this?” the court questioned, emphasizing the need to uphold the dignity of women.
The court, while acknowledging the sensitivity surrounding religious practices, stressed the importance of ensuring such practices align with the constitutional ethos of the nation. It requested submissions from all parties regarding various forms of Talaq under Islamic law, framing the issue not as striking down a religious practice, but as regulating it in accordance with the Constitution.
The court’s scrutiny was particularly focused on the impact of Talaq-e-Hasan on vulnerable women. Hearing the plea of journalist Benazeer Heena, who is struggling to prove her divorce while her ex-husband has remarried, the court recognized the potential for abuse and the difficulties faced by women lacking resources and awareness. “What about those unheard voices living in remote areas? Access to justice cannot be limited to those who can raise their voices,” Justice Kant observed.
Senior Advocate M.R. Shamshad, representing the ex-husband of Heena, defended the practice of sending divorce notices through representatives. The court rebuked the practice asking Shamshad, “How are you promoting this in 2025? Is this how the dignity of a woman is upheld? Should a civilized modern society allow this kind of practice.”
The court has allowed the All India Muslim Personnel Law Board and Samastha Kerala Jamiyyathul Ulama to intervene in the matter. It had previously sought input from the National Commission for Women (NCW), National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), and the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR).
The Supreme Court’s decision on whether to refer the case to a larger bench will be a crucial step in determining the future of Talaq-e-Hasan and its compatibility with the constitutional rights of Muslim women in India.
First Piper 