SC to hear plea against polygamy, nikah halala in Jan 2020 | WeForNews | Latest News, Blogs SC to hear plea against polygamy, nikah halala in Jan 2020 – WeForNews | Latest News, Blogs
Connect with us

India

SC to hear plea against polygamy, nikah halala in Jan 2020

Published

on

Talaq Halala Divorce

New Delhi, Dec 2 : The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a plea challenging practices of polygamy and “nikah halala”, the process for a woman who wants to remarry her divorced husband, among the Muslim community after its winter break.

A bench, headed by Chief Justice S.A. Bobde and comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Surya Kant, declined to list the matter for urgent hearing, but agreed to examine the plea in January 2020 after the winter break.

Advocate and BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay mentioned the plea seeking directions declaring polygamy and nikah halala as unconstitutional and illegal. Querying the petitioners on the urgency to list the matter, Chief Justice Bobde said: “What is the urgency in the matter… aren’t these religious customs being followed for several hundred years?”

While the practice of polygamy is outlawed in the country, exemption is provided to the Muslim community under the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, which paves the way for implementation of personal law in matters connected with marriage. Similarly, nikah halala is also permitted.

The bench queried the counsel on the nature of these religious practices and how do they make up a case for urgent hearing. The counsel explained the bench that polygamy allows a Muslim man to have four wives, and under nikah halala, a Muslim woman, who intends to re-marry her husband after divorce, would have to marry another person and get divorce after consummating the marriage with the second person. Upadhyay insisted that these practices violate human rights.

“Petitioner is filing this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to declare polygamy and nikah halala, practised in Muslim community, illegal and unconstitutional for being violative of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 25 of the Constitution,” he said in his plea.

In July 2018, the top court had referred the matter to a Constitution bench, which is seized of similar petitions. The court had tagged Upadhyay’s plea with a petition filed by a petitioner names Farzana.

In August 2017, the top court banned instant “triple talaq” among Sunni Muslims, and in March 2018, referred, to a larger bench, the batch of pleas seeking to examine the constitutional validity of polygamy and nikah halala.

Cities

Priyanka Gandhi writes to Yogi, demands better price for sugarcane

The State government has fixed the sugarcane prices at Rs 315 per quintal and it has remain unchanged from the last year.

Published

on

sugarcane

New Delhi, Dec 11 : Amid protests from sugarcane farmers in western parts of Uttar Pradesh, Congress General Secretary Priyanka Gandhi Vadra on Wednesday wrote to Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and demanded better price for the sugarcane.

Priyanka Gandhi wrote: “UP government has not raised the sugarcane price this year. I am surprised that in the last crushing season also, the prices were not raised. While your Government has raised the rates of electricity, fertilizers, but the sugarcane price has not been raised, even though the cost of labour has also increased”.

“The farmers are not getting back their input cost and I request you to raise the price of the sugarcane in view of the distress in the community”, she said.

The State government has fixed the sugarcane prices at Rs 315 per quintal and it has remain unchanged from the last year.

The farmers’ Unions in the state are up in arms against this. They have blocked many arterial roads in Meerut, which is the highest sugarcane producing region in the state. The protesters blocked the main highway leading to the Meerut-Karnal road and the arterial road adjacent to Muzaffarnagar.

On Saturday the state government announced that the rates will not be changed this year also, to the disappointment of the farmers. The farmers are also worried that their dues of the previous year have also not been paid.

Continue Reading

India

JD(U) to support Citizenship Amendment Bill in Rajya Sabha

The Rajya Sabha is debating the contentious Citizenship (Amendment) Bill

Published

on

RCP Singh JDU

Delhi: The Janta Dal United JD(U) to support Citizenship Amendment Bill in Rajya Sabha. JD(U) MP Ram Chandra Prasad Singh says the Bill is not affecting any rights of Indian citizens.

JD(U) member Ram Chandra Prasad Singh said his party supports the Bill. “I am supporting this Bill. I was really amazed about this Bill and what is being discussed in the House.”

He claimed that the bill is simple that the people who were persecuted due to religion will be given citizenship rights and protected.

“Who all are citizens of India have equal rights… India has its own culture,” he said, adding that people are unnecessarily making a hue and cry of it.

He also stressed that India had three Presidents hailing from minority communities. “But we all know what is happening in Pakistan with minorities,” Singh said.

Talking about his party, Singh said: “We support brotherhood. In this country, if anything happens in the name of religion we will never be behind it. We all are Indians.”

Union Home Minister Amit Shah moved the Citizenship Amendment Bill 2019 in the Upper House on Wednesday saying that the Bill is a ray of hope for minority people living in a very critical situation in India’s three neighbouring countries – Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh – as well as for those who came to India but have not been given citizenship.

The Bill was cleared in the Lok Sabha on Monday.

Continue Reading

India

We oppose this bill as it is anti-Muslim: TRS

Published

on

Dr K Keshav Rao

Delhi: We oppose this bill as it is anti-Muslim. It is wrong to say that India was divided on the basis of religion during Partition. We were not. What is the fear in Assam today?

The fear is that some may not remain a citizen of this nation. We agree that persecuted religious minorities should be protected. But no community should be excluded.

This bill is against Muslims. It cannot be read in isolation. It has to be read along with the NRC.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Most Popular