In the 1982 film, Nikaah, in a fit of rage, Deepak Parashar divorces Salma Agah by simply uttering, “Talaq, talaq, talaq.”
Underscoring how the law is used frivolously, the film points out that Parashar regrets his hasty utterance, and wants his wife back. According to the sharia law, however, prevalent at the time, the two are divorced and the only way to remarry would be if his wife marries another man and divorces him too (known as nikah halala). The progressive film spoke about a woman’s desire not to be treated as a piece of property to be bounced about between men, both of whom claim to love her. Nikaah makes a social comment on the sharia laws of divorce (talaq) and its misuse in Indian Muslim society.
It’s been three decades since the film, but triple talaq remains. Though 22 Muslim countries—including Pakistan and Bangladesh—or their provinces have abolished it either explicitly or implicitly, India is sitting on the issue.
Recently, the AIMPLB, especially the vocal Abdur Rahim Qureshi, expressed disquiet over a petition requesting the Supreme Court to determine the constitutional validity of triple talaq. This is unfortunate because according to the Quran, the triple talaq is a crime. To see how the tenets set by the Prophet are being distorted by those with vested interests, we must examine what the Quran states.
It advises four steps before divorce. The first: ‘talking’ about the differences faced by the couple, called fa’izu hunna. The next step is wahjuru hunna or physical distance. The third is wazribu hunna, which is a second round of talks in the presence of two arbitrators. If the couple still cannot reach a resolution, then and only then does the Quran allow talaq. Even after the first talaq, there is a waiting period known as iddah. If the estranged parties are unable to unite during the period, the irrevocable triple talaq may be pronounced.
The manifestation of triple talaq is a wilful distortion of the law set down by the Holy book, by certain patriarchal forces. Triple talaq is an interpretation that was promoted by Caliph Umar, who invoked it for the sake of discouraging people from using triple talaq. There is no theological explanation for its rationalising or the adherence of the Caliph’s law, over what is written in the Quran.
By upholding the Caliph’s law, the AIMPLB is doing a disservice to society. The law does not consider woman’s rights or provide room for reconciliation between the parties. It has encouraged the divorce rate to escalate—the opposite of what the law intended.
The Delhi Commission for Women has decided to study the ‘unilateral triple talaq’ in the backdrop of a case in the Supreme Court, challenging the practice along with that of nikkah halala and polygamy.
The commission points out that the issues in Shayara Bano’s case are important to the lives of Muslim women in India. She is the first Muslim woman in India to challenge triple talaq.
The fight may take time and perseverance. It is, however, clear to all progressive minds that triple talaq is not favourable for any society.
archanadalmia@gmail.com
Dalmia is chairperson of Grievance Cell, All India Congress Committee