'ట్రిపుల్ తలాఖ్' బిల్లుకు ఆమోదం

'ట్రిపుల్ తలాఖ్' బిల్లుకు ఆమోదం 
ఓవైసీ సవరణలకు నో.. ట్రిపుల్‌ తలాక్‌కు ఆమోదం
Dec 28, 2017, 20:18 IST
 Triple Talaq Bill Passed In Lok Sabha - Sakshi
సాక్షి, న్యూఢిల్లీ : ఎట్టకేలకు ట్రిపుల్‌ తలాక్ బిల్లు (ముస్లిం మహిళల వివాహ హక్కుల పరిరక్షణ బిల్లు-2017)కు లోక్‌సభ ఆమోదం తెలిపింది. బిల్లులో ఒక్క సవరణ లేకుండా మూజువాణి ఓటుతో ఈ బిల్లుకు ఆమోదం లభించింది. అసదుద్దీన్‌ ఓవైసీ ప్రతిపాదించిన సవరణలతోపాటు ఇతరులు ప్రతిపాదించిన సవరణలకు కూడా మద్దతు లభించకపోవడంతో అవి వీగిపోయినట్లు ప్రకటించిన స్పీకర్‌ మూజువాణి ఓటుతో ఆమోదం తెలిపారు. దీంతో ఇక ఈ బిల్లు రాజ్యసభలోకి అడుగుపెట్టనుంది. గురువారం లోక్‌సభలో న్యాయశాఖ మంత్రి రవిశంకర్‌ప్రసాద్‌ ట్రిపుల్‌ తలాక్‌ బిల్లును ప్రవేశ పెట్టిన విషయం తెలిసిందే. అయితే, ఈ బిల్లుకు తాను వ్యతిరేకం అని ఎంపీ అసదుద్దీన్‌ ఓవైసీ అన్నారు. ఆయన ప్రసంగిస్తూ పలు సవరణలు ప్రతిపాదించారు.

ముస్లింలను సంప్రదించకుండానే బిల్లును తీసుకొచ్చారన్న ఆయన ఈ బిల్లు రాజ్యాంగానికి వ్యతిరేకం అన్నారు. దీనితో ముస్లిం మహిళలకు అన్యాయం జరుగుతుందని, ట్రిపుల్‌ తలాక్‌ చెప్పిన భర్త జైలుకు వెళితే ఆ కుటుంబాన్ని ఎవరు పోషిస్తారని అసదుద్దీన్‌ ప్రశ్నించారు. కాగా, అంతకుముందు మంత్రి రవిశంకర్‌ ప్రసాద్‌ మాట్లాడుతూ నేడు చారిత్రాత్మక దినం అన్నారు. ఇది కేవలం ఒక మతానికి సంబంధించినది మాత్రమే కాదని, ముస్లిం మహిళలకు పెద్ద ఊరట అని, లింగ సమానత్వం కూడా ఈ బిల్లు ద్వారా అందుతుందని చెప్పారు. ముస్లిం మహిళలకు ఈ బిల్లు ఎంతో సహాయం చేస్తుందని, ఓటు బ్యాంకు రాజకీయాలను ఈ బిల్లుతో ముడిపెట్టవద్దని ఆయన కోరారు. మరోపక్క, ఈ బిల్లును స్టాండింగ్‌ కమిటీకి పంపించాలని కాంగ్రెస్‌ డిమాండ్‌ చేసింది. కాగా, ఎంఐఎం, బిజు జనతాదల్‌ వంటి పార్టీలు మాత్రమే ఈ బిల్లు ముస్లిం మహిళలకు వ్యతిరేకం అని అన్నారు. అలాగే, ముస్లి పర్సనల్‌ లా బోర్డు కూడా ఈ బిల్లును వ్యతిరేకించింది. ఏదీ ఏమైనా మొత్తానికి ముస్లిం మహిళల వివాహ హక్కుల పరిరక్షణ బిల్లు-2017కు మూజువాణి ఓటుతో ఆమోదం లభించాయి.

ట్రిపుల్‌ తలాక్‌ బిల్లు.. ఒవైసీ అడ్డుపుల్ల
Dec 28, 2017, 11:59 IST
 Owaisi has given a notice to oppose Triple Talaq Amendment Bill - Sakshi
సాక్షి, న్యూఢిల్లీ : ట్రిపుల్‌ తలాక్‌ను నేరంగా ప్రతిపాదిస్తూ కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వం రూపొందించిన ట్రిపుల్‌ తలాక్‌ సవరణ బిల్లు నేడు లోక్‌సభ ముందుకు రానుంది. అయితే ఇది విరుద్ధమంటూ మజ్లిస్‌ పార్టీ అధ్యక్షుడు, హైదరాబాద్‌ ఎంపీ అసదుద్దీన్‌ ఒవైసీ ఖండిస్తున్నారు. గత కొంతకాలంగా ఆయన ఆ బిల్లును వ్యతిరేకిస్తూ వస్తున్న విషయం తెలిసిందే.

ఈ క్రమంలో ఆయన బిల్లు ప్రవేశపెట్టడాన్ని వ్యతిరేకిస్తూ ఈ ఉదయం ఓ నోటీసును అందించారు. లోక్‌సభ సెక్రటరీ జనరల్‌కు 72వ నిబంధన ప్రకారం నోటీసు అందజేసినట్లు ఆయన తన ట్విట్టర్‌లో వెల్లడించారు. అయితే దానిపై చర్చకు అంగీకరిస్తారా? అన్నది చూడాలి.  ‘‘ముస్లిం మహిళలను రక్షించేందుకు రూపొందించిన బిల్లు అని కేంద్రం చెబుతోంది. తద్వారా ముస్లింలను దోషిగా చూపించి రెచ్చగొట్టే విధంగా కేంద్రం చేష్టలు ఉన్నాయని స్పష్టమౌతోంది’’ అని ఆయన చెబుతున్నారు.

కావాలంటే ఆలిండియా ముస్లిం పర్సనల్‌ లాబోర్డుతో సంప్రదించి, వారి సూచనల ప్రకారం చట్టాన్ని రూపొందించాలని అసదుద్దీన్‌ గతంలోనే కేంద్ర న్యాయశాఖ మంత్రి రవిశంకర్‌ ప్రసాద్‌కు ఓ లేఖ రాశారు.

ఇక ట్రిపుల్‌ తలాక్‌ బిల్లు నేపథ్యంలో లోక్‌సభకు ఇవాళ, రేపు తప్పనిసరిగా హాజరు కావాలని ఇప్పటికే బీజేపీ ఎంపీలకు విప్‌ జారీ అయ్యింది. ముస్లిం మహిళా (వివాహ రక్షణ హక్కులు) బిల్లు-2017కు హోంశాఖ మంత్రి రాజ్‌నాథ్ సింగ్ నేతృత్వంలోని బృందం రూపకల్పన చేసిన విషయం తెలిసిందే. ఒకవేళ బిల్లు చట్టరూపం ధరిస్తే ట్రిపుల్ తలాక్ చెప్పే పురుషుడికి మూడేళ్ల జైలు శిక్ష, జరిమానా పడుతుంది. ఇంకోపక్క బిల్లును రూపొందించడంలో సరైన పద్ధతిని అవలంబించలేదని కేంద్రంపై విమర్శలు వినిపిస్తున్నాయి

తక్షణ తలాక్‌ నేరం
29-12-2017 02:58:09


వెంటవెంటనే చెబితే మూడేళ్ల జైలు
చరిత్రాత్మక బిల్లుకు లోక్‌సభ ఆమోదం
మద్దతు ఇస్తూనే... కాంగ్రెస్‌ ‘సవరణ’ స్వరం
స్థాయీ సంఘానికి పంపాలని సూచన
బిల్లును తీవ్రంగా వ్యతిరేకించిన మజ్లిస్‌
ఆర్జేడీ, బీజేడీ, అన్నా డీఎంకేదీ అదేబాట
3 సవరణలను ప్రతిపాదించిన ఒవైసీ
241-2 తేడాతో వీగిపోయిన సవరణలు
నేడు రాజ్యసభ ముందుకు రానున్న బిల్లు
ఎగువసభలో ఆమోదంపై ‘ఉత్కంఠ’
ఇది మత అంశం కానే కాదు: రవిశంకర్‌
ఏకాభిప్రాయంతో ఆమోదించండి: మోదీ
దేశంలో 9 కోట్ల మంది ముస్లిం మహిళలున్నారు. భర్త తమకు ఎప్పుడు తలాక్‌ చెబుతారో అని వారిక ఎంత మాత్రం భయపడాల్సిన పనిలేదు.
కేంద్ర సహాయ మంత్రి ఎంజే అక్బర్‌
మోదీ వంటి సోదరుడు ఉండగా ముస్లిం మహిళలు ఇక ఎంత మాత్రం ఆందోళన చెందాల్సిన పని లేదు.
బీజేపీ ఎంపీ మీనాక్షి లేఖి

న్యూఢిల్లీ, డిసెంబరు 28: తలాక్‌... తలాక్‌... తలాక్‌! మూడు క్షణాల్లో ‘తక్షణ’ విడాకులు! ఇది చెల్లనే చెల్లదు... అని లోక్‌సభ తేల్చేసింది. ఇలా చెప్పడం శిక్షార్హమైన నేరమని స్పష్టం చేసింది. చరిత్రాత్మకమైన ‘తక్షణ తలాక్‌’ బిల్లుపై గురువారం దిగువ సభ ఆమోద ముద్ర వేసింది. ఇక... రాజ్యసభలోనూ అది గట్టెక్కితే... ‘తక్షణ తలాక్‌’ నేరం! అలా చెప్పిన వారికి మూడేళ్లు కారాగారం! ‘ముస్లిం మహిళల తలాక్‌ కష్టాలకు చెల్లుచీటీ పలుకుతున్నాం’ అంటూ బీజేపీ నేతలు సగర్వంగా ప్రకటిస్తూ... బల్లలు చరుస్తూ బిల్లుకు ఆమోదం పలికారు. ‘ముస్లిం మహిళల వివాహ హక్కుల పరిరక్షణ బిల్లు’గా పేర్కొంటున్న ‘తక్షణ తలాక్‌’ వ్యతిరేక బిల్లును కేంద్ర న్యాయశాఖ మంత్రి రవిశంకర్‌ ప్రసాద్‌ గురువారం సభ ముందు ఉంచారు. ఎంఐఎం సభ్యుడు అసదుద్దీన్‌ ఒవైసీ బిల్లును వ్యతిరేకించారు. 3 సవరణలను సభ 241-2 ఓట్ల తేడాతో తిరస్కరించింది. బిల్లును యథాతథంగా ఆమోదించింది. దీన్ని శుక్రవారం రాజ్యసభకు పంపుతారు. ఒకేసారి ముమ్మారు తలాక్‌ చెప్పడం రాజ్యాంగ విరుద్ధమని ఆగస్టులో సుప్రీంకోర్టు ప్రకటించింది. 6 నెలల్లోగా చట్టాన్ని రూపొందించాలని కేంద్రాన్ని సూచించింది. ఈ మేరకు కేంద్రం కసరత్తు చేసి బిల్లు తీసుకొచ్చింది.

సాధికారత దిశగా గొప్ప అడుగు
‘‘మహిళల సాధికారత దిశగా గొప్ప ముందడుగు పడింది. మహిళల గౌరవాన్ని, హక్కులను పరిరక్షించేందుకు ఈ బిల్లు దోహదపడుతుంది. ఈ బిల్లు ఏ ఒక్క మతాన్ని ఉద్దేశించింది కాదు. మహిళలకు రక్షణ కల్పించి.. వారికి న్యాయం చేయడమే మా లక్ష్యం’’ అని రవిశంకర్‌ ప్రసాద్‌ స్పష్టం చేశారు. ఇది చరిత్రాత్మకమైన రోజుగా ఆయన అభివర్ణించారు. ‘‘ఆలస్యంగా నిద్రలేచిందంటూ ఉత్తరప్రదేశ్‌లోని రాంపూర్‌లో ఒక మహిళకు ఆమె భర్త అప్పటికప్పుడు తలాక్‌ చెప్పేశాడు. మహిళల ప్రాథమిక హక్కులను కాలరాస్తున్నా కొందరు ఎంపీలు మౌనం పాటించడం సబబేనా? ఈ విషయాన్ని పార్లమెంటు సభ్యులే నిర్ణయించాలి’’ అని ఆవేశంగా ప్రసంగించారు.

తక్షణ తలాక్‌ను పాకిస్థాన్‌, బంగ్లాదేశ్‌, మొరాకో, ఇండోనేషియా, మలేషియా, ట్యునీషియా వంటి ఇస్లామిక్‌ దేశాలే నిషేధించాయని తెలిపారు. అదే మార్గంలో భారత్‌ పయనించాల్సిన అవసరం ఉందన్నారు. ఈ బిల్లును రాజకీయ కోణంలో చూడొద్దని సభ్యులను కోరారు. ‘‘తక్షణ తలాక్‌ రాజ్యాంగ విరుద్ధమని సుప్రీం కోర్టు ప్రకటించిన తర్వాత ఈ కేసులు తగ్గుముఖం పడతాయనుకున్నాం. కానీ... తర్వాత కూడా 100 కేసులు నమోదయ్యాయి. మేం ముస్లింల షరియాలో ఎలాంటి జోక్యం చేసుకోవడం లేదు. కేవలం తలాక్‌-ఏ-బిద్ధత్‌ గురించి మాత్రమే బిల్లులో ప్రస్తావించాం’’ అని వివరించారు. బిల్లుకు కాంగ్రెస్‌ పూర్తి మద్దతిస్తుందని లోక్‌సభలో కాంగ్రె్‌సపక్ష నేత మల్లికార్జున ఖర్గే ప్రకటించారు. అయితే బిల్లులో కొన్ని లోపాలు ఉన్నాయని, వాటిని పార్లమెంటు స్టాండింగ్‌ కమిటీని ఏర్పాటు చేసి సరిదిద్దాలన్నారు.

కాంగ్రెస్‌ ఎంపీ సుస్మితా దేవ్‌ మాట్లాడుతూ.. తక్షణ తలాక్‌ చెప్పిన భర్త మూడేళ్లపాటు జైలులో ఉంటే బాధిత మహిళకు జీవనభృతిని చెల్లించేందుకు కేంద్రం ఏమైనా కార్పస్‌ ఫండ్‌ను ఏర్పాటు చేసిందా అని ప్రశ్నించారు. బిల్లుకు మద్దతిస్తామని కాంగ్రెస్‌ ప్రకటించినా ఆ పార్టీ నేత సల్మాన్‌ ఖుర్షీద్‌ మాత్రం దానికి భిన్నంగా స్పందించారు. ‘తక్షణ తలాక్‌ చెప్పాడంటూ భర్తను జైలుకు పంపితే, అతని కుటుంబ సంరక్షణ బాధ్యత ఎవరు చూసుకుంటారు. ఇలాంటి బిల్లుకు కాంగ్రెస్‌ మద్దతు తెలపదు’ అన్నారు.

ఒక్కతాటిపైకి రండి!
విపక్షాలకు మోదీ పిలుపు
లోక్‌సభలో బిల్లు ఎన్డీయేకు భారీ మెజారిటీ ఉంది. రాజ్యసభలో మాత్రం ఎన్డీయే బలం తక్కువ! వెరసి... శుక్రవారం ఎగువ సభలో తక్షణ తలాక్‌ బిల్లు ఆమోదంపై ఉత్కంఠ నెలకొంది. ఈ నేపథ్యంలో తక్షణ తలాక్‌ బిల్లుపై అధికార, విపక్షాలు ఏకాభిప్రాయానికి రావాల్సిన అవసరం ఉందని ప్రధాని మోదీ పిలుపునివ్వడం గమనార్హం. గురువారం జరిగిన బీజేపీ పార్లమెంటరీ పార్టీ సమావేశంలో మోదీ ఈ వ్యాఖ్యలు చేశారు. బిల్లును రాజ్యసభలో ఆమోదింప చేసుకునేందుకు విపక్షాలతో చర్చలు జరిపి, ఏకాభిప్రాయాన్ని సాధించాలని పార్టీ నేతలకు ప్రధాని సూచించారని కేంద్రమంత్రి అనంతకుమార్‌ తెలిపారు. మరోవైపు... ఈ బిల్లుకు రాజ్యసభలో సవరణలు ప్రతిపాదించేందుకు కాంగ్రెస్‌ సిద్ధమవుతోంది. రాజ్యసభలో బిల్లును సవరించాలని కోరితే, సమీక్ష కోసం దాన్ని పార్లమెంటరీ కమిటీకి పంపాల్సి ఉంటుంది. వెరసి... శీతాకాల సమావేశాల్లో తక్షణ తలాక్‌ బిల్లు ఆమోదం పొందడం అనుమానమేనని విశ్లేషకులు భావిస్తున్నారు.


విపక్షాల వ్యతిరేకగళం
తక్షణ తలాక్‌ బిల్లును ఏఐఎంఐఎంతోసహా పలు విపక్ష పార్టీలు వ్యతిరేకించాయి. ముస్లిం లీగ్‌ ఎంపీ మహ్మద్‌ బషీర్‌ మాట్లాడుతూ.. ‘ముస్లిం పర్సనల్‌ లా’ను ఉల్లంఘించేలా బిల్లును రూపొందించారని, బిల్లు రూపకల్పనలో రాజకీయ లబ్ధికి పెద్దపీట వేశారని అన్నారు. ఎంఐఎంతోపాటు ఆర్జేడీ, బీజేడీ, ఇండియన్‌ యూనియన్‌ ముస్లిం లీగ్‌, అన్నాడీఎంకే ఎంపీలు బిల్లును వ్యతిరేకించారు. బిల్లును ఏకపక్షంగా.. తప్పులతడకగా రూపొందించారని పేర్కొన్నారు. సమాజ్‌వాదీ పార్టీ నేత ములాయం సింగ్‌ యాదవ్‌ కూడా బిల్లును వ్యతిరేకించారు. గతంలో ముసాయిదా బిల్లును వ్యతిరేకించిన తృణమూల్‌ గురువారం మాత్రం సభలో మౌనం పాటించింది.

How three judges struck down triple talaq, but upheld Muslim personal law

How three judges struck down triple talaq, but upheld Muslim personal law
Three opinions and the law explained.
POLITICS |  7-minute read |   22-08-2017
Nizam PashaNIZAM PASHA  @mnizampasha
---
Total Shares
The quality of journalism and public discourse in this age where substance is never more than 140 characters deep got unintentionally caricatured today by the headlines fed to news channels by reporters who ran out to give their pieces-to-camera and sound bites as soon as Chief Justice Jagdish Singh Kehar finished reading out his opinion in today’s triple talaq verdict.

The first news flashes said the Supreme Court has upheld the practice of triple talaq and referred the matter to Parliament. Those who were more diligent, listened to the opinions of Justice Rohinton Nariman and Justice Kurian Joseph and came out and reported that the practice of triple talaq has been struck down as unconstitutional. Neither of these sets of news reports expressed the correct position.

In any judgment where the court has spoken through multiple opinions, the majority and minority is to be seen for each proposition involved. A judge may be part of the majority for one part of his opinion and in the minority for another.

Based on the opinions given, this judgment can be divided into two parts for determining majority and minority:

1. Is the practice of talaq-e-biddat or triple talaq in a single sitting legal?

2. Can personal law be tested by a court on the grounds of it being unconstitutional?

And another question that arises only because the media is making much of it is: has the Supreme Court asked Parliament to take up this issue and pass a law?

Chief Justice Kehar, speaking for himself and Justice Abdul Nazeer, has held that talaq-e-biddat or instantaneous triple talaq is an integral part of the faith of Sunni Muslims and as such is protected by the fundamental right to freely practise one’s religion contained in Article 25 of the Constitution.

The reasoning he gives is that triple talaq, though not contemplated by the Quran, has been practised since the time of Caliph Umar and in 1,400 years, it has become part of the faith of Sunni Muslims. Personal law, according to Justice Kehar, is accorded constitutional protection through Article 25 of the Constitution unless it contravenes any one of “public order, morality and health”. He found that triple talaq does not in any way affect public order, morality or health and is therefore entitled to the protection of Article 25.

Justice Kehar rejects the argument that was made by the central government through the then attorney general that Muslim Personal Law (Shariat Application) Act, 1937 gave a statutory status to Muslim personal law, and having become part of a statute, it lost the protection available to personal laws and its constitutional validity can be challenged like any other statute.

bride-ss_05071703394_082217091122.jpg
Triple talaq is not a quranic practice.

This argument, if accepted, would have made the entire gamut of Muslim personal law vulnerable to challenge on grounds of inconsistency with the provisions of the Constitution.

Section 2, which is the operative provision of the 1937 Act, states that notwithstanding any custom or usage to the contrary, in all questions concerning matters that are regulated by personal laws such as succession, marriage, divorce et al the rule of decision in cases where the parties are Muslims shall be the Muslim personal law (shariat). Justice Kehar held that the limited purpose of the 1937 Act was to negate usages and customs that had come to override Muslim personal law or shariat. The 1937 Act neither declares nor lays down personal law; it only preserves it from the diluting influence of customs and usages.

Therefore, it cannot be said that Muslim personal law has acquired statutory status on this account. As a consequence, Muslim personal law is immune from challenges on grounds of constitutional invalidity.

Having thus expressed his inability to interfere with the practice of triple talaq and noting that all parties agreed that it is an abhorrent and sinful practice, Justice Kehar requested Parliament to take up the issue and undertake law reform by enacting a statute within a period of six months.

Justice Rohinton Nariman on the other hand, speaking for himself and Justice UU Lalit, held in his opinion that the 1937 Act both recognises and enforces personal law and therefore like any other statute, it comes within the definition of a "law in force" in the chapter on fundamental rights in the Constitution, bringing the entire gamut of Muslim personal law with it.

Having held so, Justice Nariman tests the practice of triple talaq on the anvil of the right to equality contained in Article 14 which also encompasses a prohibition against arbitrariness and holds that the practice is manifestly arbitrary as it is dependent entirely on the whim and caprice of the husband.

He further holds that the practice of triple talaq is not protected by the right to freely practise one’s religion as it is not an essential religious practice and is merely tolerated even by the Hanafi school of Islam. Therefore, he set aside the practice of triple talaq by striking down the 1937 Act to the extent that it makes triple talaq the rule of law applicable to Muslims.

In this split decision, the opinion of Justice Joseph became critical and the final outcome of the case turned entirely on who he chose to side with. Justice Joseph chose to side with Chief Justice Kehar on the question of whether after the 1937 Act, Muslim personal law acquired statutory status and lost its protection as personal law. His words on this are clear and unambiguous:

“In that view of the matter, I wholly agree with the learned Chief Justice that the 1937 Act is not a legislation regulating talaq. Consequently, I respectfully disagree with the stand taken by Nariman, J that the 1937 Act is a legislation regulating triple talaq and hence, the same can be tested on the anvil of Article 14.”

Therefore, Muslim personal law as a body of law acquires the status of a fundamental right protected under Article 25 of the Constitution by the verdict of the majority of three judges of the Supreme Court. The position of law has, therefore, become clear that practices forming part of Muslim personal law cannot be challenged in courts on grounds of their being in conflict with other fundamental rights granted by the Constitution.

However, Justice Joseph examines the practice of triple talaq in light of the method of divorce prescribed in the Quran, which includes a three-month period of reconciliation after the pronouncement during which talaq can be revoked, followed by mediation.

Only if all methods fail does talaq take effect, for which it must be confirmed in the presence of witnesses and must be accompanied by a fair separation. This being the procedure of talaq given in the Quran, Justice Joseph finds that a religious practice contrary to the Quran itself cannot be part of the personal law of Muslims. “What is bad in theology”, he says, “is bad in law as well”.

So purely in the striking down of the practice as illegal, he forms a majority with Justice Nariman and Justice Lalit, albeit for very different reasons. However, with his concurrence, the law laid down by Justice Kehar in his judgment according protection to personal laws against challenges of unconstitutionality has become the law of the land declared by the Supreme Court and binding on its citizens and governments alike.

Since the reference to Parliament was made by Justice Kehar and Justice Nazeer while upholding the triple talaq as the only recourse available to those aggrieved by this sinful and egregious practice, the reference becomes unnecessary in light of the fact that the practice was struck down by the other three judges. Therefore, any government action to interfere with Muslim personal law through legislation using the view expressed by a minority of the Supreme Court on this point will be nothing short of rank political opportunism.

Bulldozing triple talaq bill in Parliament

Bulldozing triple talaq bill in Parliament is unconstitutional and disservice to Muslim women
Criminalising Muslim men for a civil offence is gross abuse of human rights.
VARIETY |   Long-form |   28-12-2017
DailyBiteDAILYBITE 
8
Total Shares
The bill to criminalise instant triple talaq, officially known as the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, was tabled in Lok Sabha today, December 28, by the Union minister of law, Ravi Shankar Prasad. Effectively, the bill criminalises talaq-e-biddat, or the practice of instant and unilateral triple talaq from the Muslim husband to the wife, and punishes the husband with a jail term of maximum three years as well as by imposing a fine.

The bill has been drafted in three months after the landmark Supreme Court order declaring instant triple talaq and “unconstitutional and void”, in a case that hogged the national headlines for months and was led by Muslim women themselves.

Memorably, one of the senior advocates fighting the case, Indira Jaising, on behalf of the petitioners, particularly the Bebaak Collective, had termed instant triple talaq a “civil death for a Muslim woman”.

Concern from Muslim women activists

However, the very activists and Muslim women and groups at the forefront of the movement to make the Supreme Court strike down instant triple talaq, have expressed grave concerns about the bill floated by the government. Both the Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan and Bebaak Collective representatives have called into question the aim of the bill to criminalise a civil wrong - that of terminating the marriage, a civil contract under Muslim law, unilaterally and instantly - and punish Muslim men and sending them to jail. This not only changes the nature of the marriage contract - a civil agreement between the husband and wife - but tries to interpret as a sacrament, indissoluble.

What the government says

The government, particularly Prime Minister Narendra Modi as well as Union law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad have sought bipartisan support for the bill, which ironically has been made with minimal to nil consultation with the actual stakeholders. Union minister Prasad has cited Islamic countries where instant triple talaq is banned has nevertheless omitted the fact that it’s not criminalised anywhere either, and continues to be a civil and unconstitutional wrong.

There’s also the point that the government has taken the minority view in the SC judgment (which asked the Centre to frame law on the issue, and held that it was valid under Islamic law) and pinned its argument on the dissenting judgement by the then chief justice JS Khehar.


Utkarsh Anand
@utkarsh_aanand
Is the Govt mistaken or is it misleading? 
The third slide refers to the minority view of the Supreme Court judgement in #TripleTalaq case. 
The SC, by a majority judgement, never asked the Govt to frame a law. The #TripleTalaqBill also doesn't mention this. So why propagate it? https://twitter.com/rsprasad/status/946286755711291392 …

11:58 PM - Dec 27, 2017
 2 2 Replies   24 24 Retweets   25 25 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Expectedly, the Narendra Modi government has been staking its reputation on what it claims is a “historic” bill, while law minister Prasad talking about the “pain of the Muslim women”, and that this government wouldn’t repeat the mistakes of the Rajiv Gandhi-led Congress government when it overturned the landmark Shah Bano Begum judgment in 1985.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

ANI
✔
@ANI
This law is for women's rights & justice & not regarding any prayer, ritual or religion: Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad in Lok Sabha #TripleTalaqBill

11:15 PM - Dec 27, 2017
 11 11 Replies   74 74 Retweets   180 180 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

ANI
✔
@ANI
We must understand pain of Muslim women. Today morning I read news that a woman in Rampur was given talaq by her husband just because she woke up late: RS Prasad,Law Minister in Lok Sabha #TripleTalaqBill

1:36 AM - Dec 28, 2017
 13 13 Replies   61 61 Retweets   176 176 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Some members of the All India Muslim Women’s Personal Law Board have welcomed the bill, saying this would help redress the victims of instant triple talaq.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

ANI
✔
@ANI
This is a historic day, victims have suffered for years and they have been rewarded for their patience. Request all MPs to help pass #TripleTalaqBill : Shaista Ambar, All India Muslim Women's Personal Law Board (AIMWPLB)

12:43 AM - Dec 28, 2017
 12 12 Replies   105 105 Retweets   279 279 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Opposition to the bill

However, clamours of resentment were heard from a number of legislators from the political Opposition, particularly the AIMIM, RJD, BJD, All India Muslim League, among others. AIMIM’s Asaduddin Owaisi, a barrister himself, has led the charge of the light brigade against the bill, saying violates the fundamental rights of Muslim men and lacks legal coherence. This view has been echoed by a number of legal luminaries, who are expert at Muslim Personal Law as well as the Indian Constitution, in addition to the advocates fighting the triple talaq case in the court.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

ANI
✔
@ANI
Asaduddin Owaisi, AIMIM President has given a notice to oppose the introduction of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage Bill) 2017 in Lok Sabha #TripleTalaqBill (File pic)

9:47 PM - Dec 27, 2017
 10 10 Replies   11 11 Retweets   42 42 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

ANI
✔
@ANI
This bill violates fundamental rights & lacks legal coherence: Asaduddin Owaisi in Lok Sabha #TripleTalaqBill

11:05 PM - Dec 27, 2017
 49 49 Replies   35 35 Retweets   110 110 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
8h

ANI
✔
@ANI
This bill violates fundamental rights & lacks legal coherence: Asaduddin Owaisi in Lok Sabha #TripleTalaqBill pic.twitter.com/ch48CGIUvm


ANI
✔
@ANI
This bill is flawed, there are many internal contradictions in the Bill :BJD MP Bhartruhari Mahtab in Lok Sabha #TripleTalaqBill pic.twitter.com/525aKIKrpD

11:10 PM - Dec 27, 2017
View image on Twitter
 5 5 Replies   9 9 Retweets   26 26 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

The Congress has taken a guarded approach, selectively supporting the bill, while questioning what it says are inconsistencies and lack of clarity within the bill itself, including on the subsistence allowance, burden of proof, among other issues.

9h

Congress Live
✔
@INCIndiaLive
Replying to @INCIndiaLive
When the husband is jailed after Talaq, will the wife have rights on husband's property or will she be abandoned? The Bill should give clarification of these things: @rssurjewala #TripleTalaqBill #TripleTalaq


Congress Live
✔
@INCIndiaLive
#TripleTalaqBill is a significant Bill. @INCIndia has maintained that any action to protect a woman's rights is always encouraged. However, there are some issues the bill needs to clarify like whether the burden of proof of #TripleTalaq lies on the wife: @sushmitadevmp

10:15 PM - Dec 27, 2017
 40 40 Replies   218 218 Retweets   500 500 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
9h

Congress Live
✔
@INCIndiaLive
Replying to @INCIndiaLive
Section 5 of the proposed #TripleTalaqBill has discussed subsistence allowance. The details of this allowance is not present in the Bill. Will divorced woman's maintenance be continued, is not clear: @rssurjewala #TripleTalaq


Congress Live
✔
@INCIndiaLive
When the husband is jailed after Talaq, will the wife have rights on husband's property or will she be abandoned? The Bill should give clarification of these things: @rssurjewala #TripleTalaqBill #TripleTalaq

10:12 PM - Dec 27, 2017
 127 127 Replies   258 258 Retweets   633 633 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
9h

Congress Live
✔
@INCIndiaLive
Replying to @INCIndiaLive
#TripleTalaqBill is a significant Bill. @INCIndia has maintained that any action to protect a woman's rights is always encouraged. However, there are some issues the bill needs to clarify like whether the burden of proof of #TripleTalaq lies on the wife: @sushmitadevmp


Congress Live
✔
@INCIndiaLive
There is no doubt about the fact that @INCIndia will help the government to bolster the right of Muslim women. But the bill needs to be watertight when it comes to the financial security of women: @sushmitadevmp #TripleTalaq #TripleTalaqBill

10:16 PM - Dec 27, 2017
 22 22 Replies   222 222 Retweets   558 558 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

ANI
✔
@ANI
Will the govt create a corpus to provide maintenance to divorced women waiting for compensation?: Sushmita Dev, Congress in Lok Sabha #TripleTalaqBill

2:29 AM - Dec 28, 2017
 12 12 Replies   22 22 Retweets   47 47 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

In addition, in the preamble of the bill, the confusion over istant triple talaq, now outlawed by the Supreme Court, and triple talaq, the Islamic way of mutual divorce that’s perfectly valid, has been spotted, causing much alarm among observers and the political Opposition.

11h

Tehseen Poonawalla
✔
@tehseenp
Replying to @tehseenp
So now all of us should actually thank the govt & @narendramodi ji for bringing in this bill. The SC asked Parliament to legislate on the issue & it HAS to be done . So that is a good step by the govt . So where is the controversy ? N


Tehseen Poonawalla
✔
@tehseenp
The controversy is based on those who have read the draft #TripleTalaqBill say :
a) the preamble does not use instant #TripleTalaq instead the #TripleTalaqBill only uses #TripleTalaq . This makes a legitimate process illegal . N

8:01 PM - Dec 27, 2017
 4 4 Replies   130 130 Retweets   182 182 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Congress leader Salman Khurshid has underlined that the bill doesn’t benefit Muslim women and instead sends into further financial and social insecurity by jailing their errant husbands. Women’s rights activists have pointed out that the penalising might discourage reporting of instant triple talaq, or worse still, may lead to desertion of the wife by the husband without technically giving instant triple talaq.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

ANI
✔
@ANI
I don't think we can support it because they didn't made us understand how this criminality of Triple Talaq will benefit women. If someone is lodged in prison as a punishment for saying Triple Talaq, who will take care of his family: Salman Khurshid, Congress on #TripleTalaqBill

9:20 PM - Dec 27, 2017
 400 400 Replies   139 139 Retweets   269 269 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Bulldozing the bill

There are also concerns that the government isn’t giving enough time to deliberate on the crucial bill that’s riddled with problems. It has been pointed out that Prasad’s insistence that the bill be passed in Lok Sabha today itself has caused a justified uproar in Parliament, with the Opposition leader in Lok Sabha, Mallikarjun Kharge asking for more time. It must be said that the government’s intention to score political points must not override what is going to be a matter of life and dignity of Muslim women and men.

"Triple Talaq" Bill In Parliament Now

"Triple Talaq" Bill In Parliament Now, Minister Says It's About Equality
The BJP has long pushed for a uniform civil code, which would stop religious laws operating in issues like marriage, divorce and property inheritance. Religious institutions were initially allowed to govern these issues to protect the independence of different faiths.
All India | Edited by Shylaja Varma | Updated: December 28, 2017 14:17 IST
  by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored
Domino's Cook Retires Forever After 94,349,014 Rupee Win (ViralStories4U)
4000 Magazines At ₹999 Only - Annual Subscription (Magzter)
211
SHARES
EMAIL
PRINT
6
COMMENTS
'Triple Talaq' Bill In Parliament Now, Minister Says It's About Equality
NEW DELHI:  The government today tabled a bill in parliament seeking to make instant "Triple Talaq" a criminal offence. Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, who introduced the bill in the lower house, called it a "historic day" amid opposition to its introduction by members of different parties, including RJD, AIMIM, BJD and All India Muslim League. Instant "Triple Talaq" is an Islamic practice that allows men to divorce their wives immediately by stating "talaq" (divorce) thrice. The bill proposes a three-year jail term and a fine for any Muslim man who indulges in the practice.

Asaduddin Owaisi, the chief of AIMIM, said the 'bill will do injustice for Muslim women".

Parliament has to decide whether the victims of triple talaq have fundamental rights or not, he said after some opposition members claimed it violated the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

"It is a historic day. We are making history today," Mr Prasad said.


The proposed law would only be applicable on instant "Triple Talaq" or 'talaq-e-biddat' and give power to the victim to approach a magistrate seeking "subsistence allowance" for herself and minor children.

The woman can also seek the custody of her minor children from the magistrate who will take a final call on the issue. Under the law, instant "Triple Talaq" in any form -- spoken, in writing or by electronic means such as email, SMS and WhatsApp -- would be bad or illegal and void.

According to the proposed law which would be applicable to the entire country except Jammu and Kashmir, giving instant talaq would attract a jail term of three years and a fine. It would be a non-bailable offence.

(With inputs from PTI)

Why Modi govt wants this law

Triple talaq: Why Modi govt wants this law and what Muslim Women Protection Bill says
The Narendra Modi government has justified bringing a law that criminalises instant triple talaq saying that the illegal practice has continued despite the Supreme Court ruling against it.


Prabhash K Dutta
New Delhi, December 28, 2017 | UPDATED 13:27 IST
A +A -
Triple Talaq Bill
HIGHLIGHTS
1Instant triple talaq was declared illegal in August.
2Triple talaq Bill criminalises talaq-e-biddat.
3Violators may invite jail term upto three years.
After a long drawn legal battle, the Supreme Court declared in August this year, by a majority of 3:2, divorce through instant triple talaq among Muslims as "void", "illegal" and "unconstitutional".

Four months later, the Narendra Modi government is ready with a Bill that criminalises instant triple talaq. Many critics of the government have raised question as to what is the need for a enacting separate law to ban a practice that has been declared void, illegal and unconstitutional.

The Narendra Modi government has drafted the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Marriage Bill saying it is putting into effect the Supreme Court ruling on instant triple talaq. In the August ruling, the minority judgment, too, held instant triple talaq against Islamic belief but said that Parliament should bring legislation in this regard.

WHY MODI GOVERNMENT WANTS TRIPLE TALAQ LAW

In the statement of objects and reasons, the triple talaq Bill refers to the Shayara Bano versus Union of India case, the proposed law states, "In spite of the Supreme Court setting aside talaq-e-biddat (instant triple talaq), and the assurance of the AIMPLB (All India Muslim Personal Law Board), there have been reports of divorce by way of talaq-e-biddat from different parts of the country."

"It is seen that setting aside talaq-e-biddat by the Supreme Court has not worked as any deterrent in bringing down the number of divorces by this practice among certain Muslims," the Bill says building the context for the proposed law.

The Ministry of Law and Justice, which has drafted the Bill further states in the draft law that "to prevent the continued harassment being meted out to the hapless married Muslim women due to talaq-e-biddat, urgent suitable legislation is necessary."

WHAT TRIPLE TALAQ BILL SAYS

Named as the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill 2017, the proposed law states, "Any pronouncement of talaq by a person upon his wife, by words, either spoken, written or in electronic form or in any other manner whatsoever, shall be void and illegal."

The triple talaq Bill provides for imprisonment of up to three years for violating the law. "Whoever pronounces talaq...upon his wife shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and fine," the Bill reads.

The divorced woman, according to the triple talaq Bill, is entitled to "receive from her husband such amount of subsistence allowance for her and dependent children."

The triple talaq Bill also makes the divorced woman custodian of minor children.  The Bill also makes pronouncement of instant triple talaq a non-bailable offence under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill 2017 can be read here.

When Jinnah made bail plea for Tilak

Jun 15 2014 : The Times of India (Mumbai)
When Jinnah made bail plea for Tilak
Manjiri Damle
Pune
TNN
http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31804&articlexml=When-Jinnah-made-bail-plea-for-Tilak-15062014009026


It is known to be one of the most inspiring legal battles in the history of trials in the world. Some even liken it to a brilliant game of chess.
And the protagonist was a proud Puneite, the father of Indian unrest against the British, Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak.As Pune gets ready on Sunday to mark the centenary of Tilak's release from Mandalay jail in Burma (now Myanmar) following his conviction in a sedition case, Vinay Dhumale, a noted researcher on Tilak, pointed out that the trial, Tilak's almost impregnable defence of himself and his fight for freedom of expression have become an important milestone in India's freedom struggle.
No wonder then that the final summation by Lokamanya Tilak, post the jury's verdict, is inscribed in golden letters in the same central hall of the Bombay high court where the trial was conducted in 1908. There were many interesting aspects of Tilak's trial, says Dhumale. When Ti lak was arrested for his “seditious” writings in daily Kesari, one advocate Davar had applied for his bail in the lower court, which was rejected. Interestingly, it was Davar’s father, justice Dinshaw Davar, who awarded the six-year jail term to Tilak for sedition.
“The son was very upset after the verdict and it was Tilak himself who consoled him and told him that his father only did his job and he (Tilak) bore no rancour toward him,” said Dhumale.
There was another attempt for bail where Tilak was represented by none other
than barrister Muhammad Ali Jinnah. This application too had come before Dinshaw Davar, who rejected it. The third bail appeal was, however, successful. The trial in the case started later.Dhumale said the period leading to Tilak's trial is significant because it marked the spirited fight by Tilak against British repression. Tilak was facing sedition charges over his fiery articles that had appeared in Kesari. “Tilak unleashed the phenomenal might of his pen and wrote series of devastating editorials in Kesari. Some of the articles were also penned by K P Khadilkar, an associate of Tilak. Most of these articles have acquired an iconic status in the realm of Marathi journalism. Tilak and his associates not only challenged various governmental actions, which were draconian in nature, but challenged the very basis of the British government ruling the Indian population,“ he said.
A month before the trial started, on June 8, 1908, Tilak was about to leave for Mumbai (then called Bombay) to help another Marathi newspaper editor S M Paranjape from possible prosecution. He was cautioned at Pune railway station by a well-wisher connected with local police intelligence that he should cancel the trip as it was likely he too would be arrested and sent to jail. Dhumale said that Tilak had thanked the gentleman for the cautionary word but told him that when the entire country had been turned into one big jail by the British government it made no difference to him even if he was arrested.
For the full report, log on to http://www.timesofindia.com
Click To Enlarge



Make Triple Talaq Punishable But Not Criminal Offence:

Make Triple Talaq Punishable But Not Criminal Offence: 

Muslim Women Ahead of Bill
Speaking on the important gender-just provisions that should 

be included in the Bill, Zakia Soman from BMMA said that the 

purpose of this Bill is gender justice, “Criminalization in itself 

cannot serve the objective.”
Eram Agha | News18.comEramAgha

Updated:December 26, 2017, 9:27 AM IST 

facebookTwittergoogleskype
Make Triple Talaq Punishable But Not Criminal Offence: 

Muslim Women Ahead of Bill The Supreme Court had struck 

down triple talaq terming it 'unconstitutional'. (Network18 

Creatives)
New Delhi: Two days before tabling of the Muslim Women Bill 

in Parliament, some women who came out against triple talaq 

believe that criminalizing the practice won’t get them gender 

justice, instead the law would only be a ploy for the 

government to target Muslim men. 

However, other victims of the triple talaq practice beg to 

disagree.


Muslim women activists who fought in the Supreme Court and 

had suffered because of the un-Islamic practice argue that 

criminalization “cannot serve the objective” as marriage is a 

civil matter. 

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 

2017 will be tabled in the Lok Sabha on December 28, 2017 

and Ravi Shankar Prasad will introduce the Bill to “protect the 

rights of married Muslim women” and stop the practice of 

instant triple talaq. 

Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan (BMMA), one of the 

petitioners in the case titled Muslim Women's Quest for 

Equality, says that the Bill should be referred to the Standing 

Committee of the Parliament and amendments should be 

made.

Speaking on the important gender-just provisions that should 

be included in the Bill, Zakia Soman from BMMA said that the 

purpose of this Bill is gender justice, “Criminalization in itself 

cannot serve the objective.”

Recognizing the importance of deterrence in law, the group 

further demands, “The deterrence in this law should be 

guided by the other progressive laws such as the bigamy law, 

dowry law or the law against domestic violence. Marriage is a 

civil matter and there is punishment. It should be treated like 

that and there should be a fear of punishment,” said BMMA.

Citing an example of the bigamy law of Section 494 of the IPC, 

Soman said bigamy is a non-cognizable but bailable offence. 

“Violation of the triple talaq law should invite penalty and 

punishment accordingly and proportionately,” Soman said.

However, triple talaq victim Arshiya Ismail, who is the chief 

training officer in a Army College, said, “Marriage is a civil act 

but instant triple talaq should be criminal. If that does not 

happen, men will always find a way out.”

Ishtar Jehan, who is the crusader against instant triple talaq 

hailing from Bengal, also believes it should be treated as a civil 

matter.

Nazia Elahi Khan, Ishtar Jehan's lawyer said, “The 

punishment for triple talaq should be stricter, preferably as a 

civil matter because there are provisions. The culprit should 

be put behind bars at least for three years and the Bill should 

make sure instant triple talaq is punishable.”

“The Bill should lay down the procedure of divorce as per the 

talaq-e-ehsan method involving reconciliation and mediation 

between husband and wife over a period of at least 90 days. 

Besides, in case of divorce following this procedure, the wife 

should be provided financial support for herself and her 

children,” added Soman.

The Muslim women groups have been calling for a codified 

Muslim family law based on the Quran and compliant with the 

Constitutional provisions.

“This would enable Muslim women to get gender justice in 

family matters. The Muslim women must get legal parity just 

like Hindu women and Christian women through codified law,” 

added Soman.

Bebaak Collective, one of the women’s rights groups who 

favoured a law against triple talaq on December 21, 2017 

spoke out against the criminalization of instant triple talaq. The 

Bill, in their opinion is a vicious ploy of the BJP government to 

criminalize Muslim men with the new law. 

Formulated in the name of safeguarding women’s rights, the 

Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill fails in 

its primary mission. Activists of Bebaak Collective that was one 

of the interveners in the Supreme Court case, say, “If this law 

is passed, it will not only criminalize Muslim men but adversely 

affect Muslim women and children, whose survival will be at 

stake.”

Rivals whet knife to slice Centre’s triple talaq Bill
By Amit Agnihotri, Manish Anand and Richa Sharma  |  Express News Service  |   Published: 26th December 2017 08:00 AM  |  

Last Updated: 26th December 2017 08:00 AM  |   A+A A-   |  

Triple talaq, muslim, women, burkha, burqa,
NEW DELHI: The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, is expected to generate much heat when Parliament’s winter session resumes after the Christmas break on Wednesday.

With the Bill likely to be introduced in the Lok Sabha on Thursday, the Opposition is preparing to target the government for rushing a sensitive legislation that criminalises triple talaq, imposes a prison term of up to three years on husbands who violate the law and slaps a fine on them.

The objective of the Bill, which has been circulated among MPs, is to ensure the larger constitutional goals of gender justice and gender equality of married Muslim women and promote their fundamental rights to non-discrimination and empowerment.



Related Article
Uttar Pradesh BJP urges AIMPLB to give up 'rigid' stand on triple talaq
Triple Talaq Bill: BJP Minority Morcha delegation thanks PM Modi
Triple talaq victims slam All India Muslim Personal Law Board for opposing government bill
But the Opposition has refused to buy this. While the Congress and the Left parties say the issue is sensitive and needs wider public consultation, the Samajwadi Party, which has a strong voter base among Muslims in Uttar Pradesh, feels the BJP is pushing the legislation for electoral gain.

The Rashtriya Janata Dal, which banks heavily on Muslim votes in Bihar, has accused the BJP of playing “dog-whistle politics” in the garb of gender justice. The Biju Janata Dal has asked for clarity on the three-year jail term provision.The BJP is, however, confident that the Bill will be passed in the Lok Sabha by a voice vote. “The BJP national executive in Bhubaneshwar had decided that the government must intervene to address the plight of Muslim women and ensure they are not exploited. The Bill will be instrumental in unleashing reforms in the minority community,” said a BJP leader.

Senior Congress leader Shakeel Ahmed told Express: “The government is rushing the Bill that deals with a very sensitive issue. It should first discuss the matter with all parties and community leaders to evolve a consensus.”

CPI(M) Lok Sabha MP Mohammed Salim said the Bill was a social piece of legislation with wide implications and should be referred to a standing committee so that there is wider consultation with stakeholders, including women.

“There has been no consultation process. The Supreme Court has already given a verdict and when it is already illegal, why is the government criminalising it? Moreover, triple talaq is not a rampant problem that has superseded issues like poverty, women trafficking and illiteracy. It’s just a core political game by the BJP to project the entire opposition is against it.”

CPI leader D Raja said: “In India, we have a system of standing committees scrutinising important legislations. After that, the legislation comes back to the Lok Sabha. There is a second scrutiny if needed by a Rajya Sabha standing committee, which can give a different view. It’s just a political gimmick done in a hurry with some prejudiced view,” said Raja.

RJD spokesperson Manoj Jha said: “The SC order banning instant triple talaq had sent the right message to the community. But the BJP is trying to play dog-whistle politics that exposes its shallow concern for Muslims.”Samajwadi Party member Javed Ali Khan said: “More than protecting the interests of Muslim women, the Bill aims to make Hindu fanatics happy.”

Provisions of the bill

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017 criminalises instant triple talaq, making it a cognizable offence
Proposes that the practice will be a non-bailable offence
Husbands who violate the provisions will get a jail term of three years and fine
Provides for ‘subsistence allowance’ to a woman who has been given instant triple talaq, and grants her the custody of minor children

BJP members attacked Dalit students for burning the copies of the Manusmriti at Satavahana University

BJP, Dalit groups clash at Satavahana University, investigation under way
Members of the Bharatiya Janata Party allegedly attacked a group of Dalit students who were burning copies of the Manusmriti.
Telangana: BJP, Dalit groups clash at Satavahana University, investigation under way
HT Photo
Two groups were involved in violent clashes on Monday at Telangana’s Satavahana University after some students tried to burn copies of the Manusmriti, calling it casteist, The News Minute reported.

At least eight people – members of the Bharatiya Janata Party and its students’ wing – allegedly used sticks and stones to attack a group of Dalit students who were burning the books. While the Dalit groups claimed to be observing the Manusmriti Dahan Diwas (“Manusmriti Burning Day”), the BJP workers claimed they acted against anti-India slogans.

Police baton-charged the students to bring the situation under control, The New Indian Express reported.

The Dalit students claimed that the attackers were outsiders, but the police said they were also students. Police detained around 22 people from both groups and seized their phones. They are examining videos of the incident and an investigation is underway.

“As usual, we planned to burn the casteist book,” Jupakka Srinivas of Progressive Democratic Students’ Union told The News Minute. “The incident took place around 10.30 am. We don’t know who these people were. They barged into the campus when we were about to burn the papers of Manusmriti...There was no dialogue.”

He said this was the first time such an incident happened on the campus, and that the BJP’s student wing, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidya Parishad, had never objected to the burning of Manusmriti earlier. Those burning the book were members of the Progressive Democratic Students’ Union, Dalit Students Union, Telangana Vidyarthi Vedika and Bahujan Students Union.

Bandi Sanjay, a local Bharatiya Janata Party spokesperson, claimed that the party’s workers intervened because the other group was shouting slogans against India, Hinduism and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. He also claimed that the incident took place outside the campus.

He said the Dalit groups first attacked the BJP workers, but the police shot only those videos that show saffron party workers indulging in violence.

Sanjeev Kumar, the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, Karimnagar, said the attackers were students who were observing Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s birthday. When they saw the Dalit students trying to burn copies of Manusmriti, they got into arguments and it escalated into attacks with stones, he said.

ABVP burns Manusmriti copies in JNU

ABVP burns Manusmriti copies in JNU
Kritika Sharma Sebastian NEW DELHI:,  MARCH 09, 2016 07:54 IST
UPDATED: SEPTEMBER 06, 2016 10:51 IST
SHARE ARTICLE  758 PRINT A A A

ABVP burns Manusmriti copies in JNU MORE-IN
JNU Row
Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) students, including former and current members of the ABVP, burnt copies of the Manusmriti to protest against “derogatory verses” in the Hindu religious text.

The students chose International Women's Day to send out the message that anything derogatory towards women will not be tolerated.

“Today is women’s day and in order to oppose the derogatory remarks made against women in the Manusmriti, we have burnt certain portions of the text,” said Jatin Goraiya, vice-president of the ABVP unit in JNU. The students burnt the pages of the text that contained 40 “derogatory” references against women.

Some of the points included “2/213. It is the nature of the women to seduce men in this world, for that reason the wise are never unguarded in the company of females” and “2/214. Women, true to their class character, are capable of leading astray men in this world, not only a fool but even a learned and wise man. Both become slaves of desire”.

Pradeep Narwal, who recently left the ABVP citing “ideological differences,” was one of the main organisers of the event. He read out the 40 points before burning the pages of the text.

“I have problems with these 40 points that are derogatory towards women and Dalits. If anyone thinks I am not right, they can tell me,” he said.

The students raised slogans such as Manuwad ho barbad, Brahmanwad ho barbad and Jatiwad ho barbad.

Given the recent controversy over the Afzal Guru event, the university administration had raised objections but the organisers said permission for such an event was not required as it would not pose any threat to the law and order situation.

“The administration seems to be acting really cautiously these days. They objected to the event but we told them that this will not endanger the law and order situation in the university in any way so we went ahead with it,” Mr Narwal said.

A security guard from the university administration took videos of the event.

People Of UP Wish They Were Cows

People Of UP Wish They Were Cows
Published: December 22, 2017 19:09 IST
  by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored
Domino's Cook Retires Forever After 94,349,014 Rupee Win (ViralStories4U)
WH Coimbatore - Introductory Offer Starting at INR 5,299*. Includes Wi-Fi, Breakfast and Hotel Cr… (ITC Hotels)
394
SHARES
EMAIL
PRINT
28
COMMENTS
In Uttar Pradesh, it is increasingly clear that it is better to be a cow than a human being. On Monday, while the nation watched with keen interest the Gujarat election result, the UP government keenly proceeded with this most important agenda of looking after its cows. It announced that every district would have a Gau Sanrakshan Samiti (Cow Protection Committees) consisting of the District Magistrate, the SP, the District Development Officer and two "cow lovers" chosen from cow-loving associations.

Imagine the plight of these poor officers, already burdened with maintaining law in order in unmanageably large districts, 33 of them with populations above 3 million. In fact, the biggest districts in UP have populations that exceed that of New Zealand; and the crime graph in UP is constantly moving upwards. Even RSS Chief Mohan Bhagat criticized the law and order situation in the state when he met Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath in September. Now, in addition to maintaining some semblance of law and order and spearheading development programmes, these three key officers of the district will now be additionally be burdened with protecting cows, maintaining cow shelters and marketing (!) cow produce, such as incense sticks and mosquito coils!

If this weren't poison enough, they will be subject to the constant supervision and nagging of these two "cow lovers" on the committee who will presumably soon want a car with a driver and peon and a siren and a blue light to efficiently perform their duties. After all these are jobs for the "boys" who helped the BJP come to power.

All this would be funny if it weren't so tragic. UP is amongst the poorest states in India with one third of 210 million+ people below the official poverty line (and that line is pretty low in itself). That's a whopping 70 million people (more than the population of the UK) who don't earn enough to feed and look after themselves in a manner befitting a human being and yet, they must take second place to cows!

And they are. UP, which has a huge informal sector that produces handicrafts, has already suffered huge setbacks because of demonetization and GST, putting the livelihood of millions at stake. Shouldn't the government have made efforts to support and market those products, rather than pushing cow dung?

While the government crusades on about protecting cows, it conveniently forgets that the Indian cow is the least efficient producer of milk, and the milk it produces does not match the quality or quantity of buffalo milk. And where there are cows producing abundant milk, they are from imported or cross breeds and not that delicate India cow, which presumably is sacred because of the milk it gives us. In UP, buffaloes provide 70% of the milk, a much higher proportion than in the country as a whole. So if the government were doing something for buffaloes, at least there would be some economic reason to the move.

Ads by ZINC

And talking economics, the economics of cattle-rearing and breeding also involved selling off the older stock. Now they can't, and since they can't, farmers don't want to keep cows because they don't recover their investment just by milking cows. They make money when cattle is sold. Now that owners cannot sell them, they release them, creating a huge uncared for cattle population.

The Times of India reported that as a result, in Jaipur, the gaushalas were overwhelmed with double their capacity at 14,000, costs of Rs. 3 crore a month, and 8,000 cows died of malnutrition. That's more than Rs. 2,000 a month per cow. To put that in context, the central government's National Old Age pension Scheme provides for Rs. 200 per month. Obviously, the elderly are less important than cows in India.

It is completely ridiculous that UP, which is one of India's most backward, least developed and maladministered states, is willing to burden its already overwhelmed bureaucracy with schemes that do not benefit the electorate but meet some religious goal post. It is unacceptable for the UP government to divert scare resources from a poverty-struck populace.

The UP, and other cow belt, state governments should carefully watch and see if milk production starts to fall as less farmers are willing to add to their cattle. If that happens, it will be a tragedy, as milk production provided marginal farmers and rural India a means of livelihood. India's white revolution should not be reversed by saffron road blocks.

(Ishwari Bajpai is Senior Advisor at NDTV.)