English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Lok Sabha passes Bill banning instant triple talaq, Rajya Sabha hurdle ahead

Published

on

Lok Sabha passes Bill banning instant triple talaq, Rajya Sabha hurdle ahead

All amendments moved by the Opposition members fall, Modi government to now work on floor management in Rajya Sabha to get Bill passed

In a historic move, though its merits may be debatable, the Lok Sabha on Thursday passed by a voice vote the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill which makes instant triple talaq a cognisable and non-bailable offence.

The Bill will now have to be introduced in Rajya Sabha where the Centre is not in a majority and will have to ensure that its floor management, in the wake of a united Opposition which has greater numbers in the House, helps in the passage of the Bill and its subsequent enactment as a law.

While the passage of the Bill in Lok Sabha, where the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led NDA coalition enjoys a brute majority, was expected the day’s proceedings also witnessed the Treasury benches and the Opposition spar on the various clauses of the draft legislation.

The appeal by Prime Minister Narendra Modi earlier in the day to all political parties to support the Bill clearly had little effect on the Opposition. The government’s refusal of the Congress-led Opposition’s demand to refer the Bill to a Standing Committee of Parliament for wider consultation also evoked a sharp response from the Opposition. Several Opposition members, including Congress president Rahul Gandhi who had walked out of the debate in protest, were absent when the Bill was put to a voice vote by Lok Sabha Speaker Sumitra Mahajan ensuring a smoother than expected passage of the draft legislation as the BJP had issued a whip to its MPs, ordering them to be present in the House during the voting process.

Union minister for law and justice Ravi Shankar Prasad, who introduced the Bill in the Lok Sabha amid protests from All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen chief and Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi and reservations expressed by the Congress party, RJD, All India Muslim League and Biju Janata Dal vociferously defended the draft legislation through the debate.

The Bill, once it clears the Rajya Sabha hurdle to be enacted as a law, seeks to criminalise instant triple talaq – a practice declared as “arbitrary, unconstitutional and unislamic” by the Supreme Court in August this year – and proposes a three year jail term and fine for any Muslim husband who pronounces talaq-e-biddat against his wife.

Soon after the Supreme Court had declared instant triple talaq as illegal and, in a minority verdict urged for a legislative framework to ban the practice, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had constituted a group of ministers comprising Union ministers Rajnath Singh, Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley and Ravi Shankar Prasad to draft a stringent law that would act as a deterrent against talaq-e-biddat.

The Bill, drafted by the committee without any consultation with Islamic organisations like the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), parliamentarians who weren’t part of the group of ministers, social organisations who work with victims of instant triple talaq and other stakeholders, has evoked a mixed response from various sections of the Islamic community.

On Thursday, as Union law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad introduced the Bill in the Lok Sabha, Owaisi opposed it saying: “This bill violates fundamental rights and lacks legal coherence. It will be an injustice to Muslim women.”

Prasad retorted, asserting that the introduction of the Bill marked a “historic day” for India and its Muslim women and said that the draft legislation “is for women’s rights and justice and not regarding any prayer, ritual or religion.”

There are several aspects of the Bill and even the process adopted by the government for drafting it that the Opposition members and a section of the Islamic community are protesting against.

Odisha chief minister Naveen Patnaik’s Biju Janata Dal, which Prasad had reportedly reached out to earlier to seek support for the Bill, has also opposed the draft legislation. Senior BJD MP Bhartruhari Mahtab told the Lok Sabha that his party does not support the Bill as “it is flawed” and has “many internal contradictions”.

The “internal contradictions” in the Bill that Mahtab talked about are many. For instance, while the Bill clearly declares in Section 3 that instant triple talaq – pronounced verball, in written or electronic form – shall be “void and illegal”, Section 5 and 6 of the draft Bill go on to propose a ‘subsistence allowance’ for a Muslim woman who is victim of talaq-e-biddat and declares that she is entitled to the custody of her minor children.

These sections of the draft law, when read together, raise a peculiar contradiction believe legal experts and also politicians who are opposing the Bill.

“The most glaring internal contradiction is found in Sections 5 and 6 which discuss post-divorce issues such as a “subsistence allowance” for the woman upon whom instant talaq “is pronounced” and the “custody of her minor children” as if her marriage is dissolved by the mere pronouncement of talaq-e-biddat. How could the authors of this Bill talk of post-divorce matters ignoring the fact that the pronouncement (instant talaq) has already been voided in Section 3 and cannot result in a divorce,” wonders A Faizur Rahman, secretary-general of the Chennai-based Islamic Forum for the Promotion of Moderate Thought, in an article for The Hindu.

Congress leader Salman Khurshid, who had assisted the Supreme Court as amicus curiae in the instant triple talaq case, has said that he feels that his party can’t support the Bill on two grounds. First, that the government “did not discuss the contents of the Bill with Opposition members before introducing it in Parliament” and second, due to the incoherent nature of the Bill itself. “If someone is lodged in prison as a punishment for saying triple talaq, who will take care of his family,” Khurshid said, alluding to the fact that the if, as per provisions of the Bill, a Muslim husband is jailed for pronouncing talaq-e-biddat then how would he pay the ‘subsistence allowance’ to his wife as guaranteed in the draft legislation.

Congress sources had told India Legal that although the party was likely to eventually support the Bill in Parliament, knowing well that it cannot afford to let the BJP take all credit for criminalizing a practice that has adversely affected lakhs of Muslim women across the country, it would vociferously protest against the Bill’s provision that makes instant triple talaq a “cognisable and non-bailable offence”.

For the Congress, the draft Bill presents a piquant situation. If the Grand Old Party, which has for decades been accused of appeasing the Muslims – a community that forms a significant votebank for the Congress – opposes the Bill, it stands to be accused by the BJP of betraying Muslim women. However, if it supports the draft legislation entirely, including the provisions that criminalise talaq-e-biddat, it stands to lose support among conservative Muslim men among the Sunni community who feel that the Bill impinges on a matter of Muslim Personal Law.

The BJP fielded several members during the debate to justify the draft legislation and also to, expectedly, slam the Congress for its appeasement of the Muslim hardliners in wake of the Supreme Court’s Shah Bano verdict.

Union minister MJ Akbar, a former Congress MP himself, hit out at those opposing the draft legislation, though he reserved his most strident criticism for the All India Muslim Personal Law Board. Slamming the AIMPLB for opposing the Bill, Akbar said: “What is the credibility of All India Muslim Personal Law Board? Who chose them to be community representatives? This slogan ‘Islam khatre mein hai’ was used before independence to divide India and is now being used to divide society, poison is being spread. You change law easily when it comes to men but you remember Allah when it comes to women.”

While the BJP MPs participating in the debate refused to spare any quarter for the Opposition, Owaisi too stuck to his criticism of the Bill, asserting: “My primary objection is two-fold: Parliament lacks legislative competence, bill lacks legislative coherence. It violates Article 15. Triple Talaq has been declared null and void already. It lacks rational nexus as sections under IPC exist…The Bill is constitutionally not valid. It will be injustice to Muslim women… If a Muslim man says triple talaq, then how is it valid when the court (the SC) has done away with it? This law will give handle to Muslim men to further subjugate women. They want to achieve their dream of putting Muslims behind the bars. Instead, create a corpus of Rs 1000 crore for Muslim women.”

With the debate over the Bill raging on well past the functioning hours of the Lok Sabha, Speaker Sumitra Mahajan decided to extend the sitting of the day’s session till the Bill was passed – which it was shortly past 7.30 pm.

Replying to the debate on the Bill, law minister Prasad took potshots at the Congress and Owaisi while asserting that: “We are not looking at this (Bill) from the lens of politics but from the lens of humanity. The jail term (for a Muslim husband pronouncing talaq-e-biddat) is up to three years and quantum of punishment will be decided by the magistrate and we have left it for the court to decide and its conscience. It is being said that we are breaking families, but when women were being abandoned, this argument found no place. Under Section 304B, if you try to burn a bride, then you will be imprisoned (sic),” Prasad said.

India News

Congress to challenge Meenakshi Natarajan’s Rajya Sabha nomination rejection in Madhya Pradesh High Court

Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan has announced that the party will challenge the rejection of her Rajya Sabha nomination in the Madhya Pradesh High Court, alleging the decision was legally flawed and that the Election Commission failed to follow a consistent approach.

Published

on

The Congress is preparing to challenge the rejection of senior leader Meenakshi Natarajan’s Rajya Sabha nomination before the Madhya Pradesh High Court, shifting the dispute from the political arena to the legal forum.

Weeks after her nomination was rejected ahead of the Rajya Sabha elections, the former Member of Parliament asserted that the decision was not the result of any lapse by Congress leaders, legal experts or those involved in preparing the nomination papers. Instead, she claimed the rejection was based on an incorrect legal interpretation.

Congress to file election petition

Natarajan said the party would file an election petition within the prescribed time and contest the entire process before the High Court. She also alleged that a deliberate narrative was created to portray the rejection as a consequence of negligence within the Congress, thereby diverting attention from the Election Commission’s role.

According to her, the Returning Officer rejected her nomination citing non-disclosure of information related to a pending case. However, she argued that Form-26, which candidates are required to submit along with their nomination papers, does not contain any specific provision requiring disclosure of such information.

Natarajan said she has contested multiple elections in the past and maintained that experienced legal experts within the Congress have handled nomination papers for years, making such an oversight highly unlikely.

Questions raised over Election Commission’s approach

The Congress leader also questioned the Election Commission’s handling of the matter, alleging that it failed to apply uniform standards in similar cases.

She referred to the case of Rajya Sabha candidate Parimal Nathwani in Jharkhand, claiming he was given 24 hours to rectify issues in his nomination papers, whereas she was not provided a similar opportunity. According to Natarajan, the differing treatment raises concerns about consistency in the poll body’s decision-making process.

Congress sources said the party’s legal cell is preparing the election petition under the guidance of senior lawyers. The dispute had earlier reached the Election Commission and subsequently the Supreme Court, but the party will now pursue the legal remedy available after the election process through the High Court.

The Congress has also alleged that the Election Commission did not act impartially during the proceedings. Party leaders claimed senior Congress representatives and lawyers reached the poll body on time to present their arguments, but the proceedings were delayed. They further alleged that the Election Commission had the authority to overturn the Returning Officer’s decision but chose not to intervene.

BJP rejects Congress allegations

The Bharatiya Janata Party dismissed the Congress’ allegations, attributing the controversy to internal issues within the opposition party.

BJP state spokesperson Ajay Yadav said the rejection of Natarajan’s nomination was the result of internal infighting in the Congress. He also claimed that the senior leader had been sidelined within her party and suggested that the Congress should introspect instead of blaming the Election Commission.

Natarajan, however, rejected claims that the Congress was responsible for any lapse leading to the rejection of her nomination.

Continue Reading

Latest Politics News

Punjab Congress faction games hold up who will lead party as poll approaches

The Congress leadership is expected to finalize the new Punjab Congress chief soon as factions oppose Amarinder Singh Raja Warring continuance as chief.

Published

on

mallikarjun-kharge

The Congress leadership is likely to decide the name of a new Punjab Pradesh Congress Comittee (PPCC) president in light of the growing factional differences emerging within the party state unit.

The decision by party president Mallikarjun Kharge on choosing the head of the state unit is likely to be finalized after he takes note of other senior leaders’ opinions on the matter, as differences over the continuation of Amarinder Singh Raja Warring as PPCC president has led to former Chief Minister Charanjit Singh Channi pitching his hat in the ring.

The leadership crisis has reflected the diverging interests of opposing factions in the Punjab Congress. Channi has the backing of several party leaders including Bharat Bhushan Ashu, Gurpreet Singh Kangar, Darshan Singh Brar, and Nazar Singh Manshahia, among other supporters of Channi, while another faction is supporting incumbent chief Warring.

The Congress needs to stem the crisis soon since the state is headed for elections next year as the term of the Bhagwant Mann-led Aam Aadmi Party government winds down. Many in the party have said that having a widely accepted state leader can strengthen the organizational structure.

The delay in decision-making has caused speculation with some senior leaders meeting BJP heavyweights in Delhi. Though these leaders have dismissed any rumours of switching sides, the strain among the factions is telling on party unity. But given the way several Rajya Sabha MPs of the Aam Aadmi Party switched to the BJP, nothing can be ruled out as election fever picks up.

Continue Reading

India News

Congress MP Manish Tewari says terror must end before India-Pakistan dialogue resumes

Congress MP Manish Tewari has questioned calls to restart India-Pakistan dialogue, arguing that meaningful talks cannot resume until Pakistan takes verifiable action against terrorism.

Published

on

Congress MP says decades of peace initiatives have repeatedly been followed by terror attacks and calls for verifiable action against terrorism before any engagement

Congress MP Manish Tewari has questioned renewed calls to resume dialogue between India and Pakistan, saying any discussion with Islamabad must first address the issue of cross-border terrorism. Responding to an appeal by 117 eminent personalities from both countries seeking the restoration of diplomatic engagement, Tewari asked whether such talks could be meaningful without concrete action against terror infrastructure.

Speaking on Friday, the Congress leader said successive Indian governments had consistently attempted to improve relations with Pakistan, but those efforts were repeatedly undermined by terrorist attacks.

According to Tewari, governments led by P.V. Narasimha Rao, H.D. Deve Gowda, I.K. Gujral, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Manmohan Singh and Prime Minister Narendra Modi all pursued dialogue with Pakistan through formal negotiations or backchannel diplomacy. However, he claimed that each attempt was followed by acts of terrorism.

Calls for proof of dismantling terror infrastructure

Tewari said the key issue was whether Pakistan had provided any verifiable assurance that it had dismantled its terror infrastructure.

Referring to former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, he said a public commitment had been made after the Parliament attack to act against terrorism, but the assurance was later withdrawn. He added that similar commitments made during the tenures of former Prime Ministers Manmohan Singh and Narendra Modi also failed to produce lasting results.

Questioning the appeal for renewed engagement, Tewari said those advocating talks should clarify what specific issues they intended to discuss while the threat of terrorism remained unresolved.

References Pahalgam terror attack and Indus Waters Treaty

The Congress MP also referred to the Pahalgam terror attack in April 2025, saying it further reinforced India’s concerns regarding terrorism.

He noted that India’s position became even more firm following the attack, pointing to the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty as part of the government’s response.

Commenting on the timing of the letter seeking renewed dialogue, Tewari said India had consistently maintained that terrorism and bilateral talks could not proceed simultaneously. He also reiterated the government’s position that it would not differentiate between terrorists and those responsible for directing such attacks.

Peace remains desirable, but security comes first

While acknowledging that millions of people across South Asia aspire for lasting peace, Tewari argued that meaningful dialogue was not possible as long as terrorism remained a continuing threat.

He said India must first receive credible assurances from Pakistan, beginning with an end to the export of terrorism, before considering any resumption of diplomatic engagement.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com