Readers’ Reaction to CCV Report on Supreme Court Verdict on Triple Talaq


Jose Joseph Kallidukil  from Chicago

 reacts to CCV's 23 August 2017 post:

Equality at last for Muslim women, rejoice! Supreme court’s triple talaq verdict historic

on Supreme court verdict and writes:


Hi James Sir,

It was indeed a Historic Verdict and Judges who had the Courage and the highest sense of Justice deserves all of our commendation.  By this Verdict the Supreme Court was giving a message not just to the Muslim Fundamentalists, but to all Religious fanatics that they can no longer Control the lives of the ordinary people in India. 

       Justice Kurian Joseph who is one among Judges penned this welcome Judgement infact made all of us Keralites living in India and abroad really proud.You may be aware that the Diocese of Kottayam has moved to the Supreme Court to reverse the High Court Verdict in the Biju Uthup Case allowing him to continue as a member of the Diocese of Kottayam.  The High Court rightly rejected the Strict Endogamy imposed by the Diocese of Kottayam on its faithful and the punitive action of expelling those married outside the community.  Their actions are in fact a serious violation of the Fundamental right of a person to choose a spouse of his or her liking.  Besides it is against many of the Cardinal principles of the Christian faith.  

      I appeal to all Catholics and other  Christian faithful in India to voice their protest against the move of the Kottayam Diocese to establish a right to deny Sacrament's to faithful who cherish a Catholic Wedding.  It may be relevant here to mention that a song sung at the most Sacred moment of a Syro Malabar Wedding Celebration says that with each Christian wedding, the Church reaches the Pinnacle of its Glory.  So by refusing to bless such weddings, the Diocese of Kottayam is hurting the growth and reputation of the Church.  Their action could cause immense harm to the entire Church and a shame for all Christians in India.

Jose kallidikil, Chicago,USA

23 August 2017                                          


Isaac Gomes from Kolkata writes

Religion is personal and should not trespass upon public life and civil liberties like right of a child, right to education, marriage, divorce, maintenance and inheritance.  All these should come under Uniform Civil Law or Uniform Civil Code.  In all civilised nations this is the practice where law is the same for all citizens irrespective of religion, race, colour and creed. In Indian courts, even in the recent Triple Talaq case, religion and personal law were given precedence. 

What should be given overriding importance is Article 14 of our Constitution. which is Equality before law. The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth

Only in India, Personal Laws like Muslim Personal Law which was created by the British to suit their aim to divide and  rule, prevail.  Supreme Court of India surprisingly hesitated on passing a unanimous judgement banning triple talaq. Now it has passed the buck on the government to pass law. In the process, we will again see vote bank politics among the MPs. 

He clarifies further as below:

Supreme Court has banned INSTANT TRIPLE TALAQ, not triple talaq.

In the light of the "landmark" Supreme Court verdict banning triple talaq, what must be remembered is that it's only the instant version of the Islamic practice that has been declared unconstitutional.

Instant triple talaq (or talaq-e-biddat) happens when the husband spells out the word 'talaq' (divorce) three times in one instance – either in a single sitting, or through phone, email, or text messages.

Many Islamic clerics and jurists have declared such form of divorce immediate and irrevocable.

Even if the husband wants to reconcile and go back to his wife, the way out is Nikah Halala (Please refer India Today sensational report published in CCV only the other day), which means the woman should remarry and consummate the second marriage, get divorced, follow the three-month 'iddat' period and return to her first husband.

Instant triple talaq has been looked down upon even by the Quran and Hadith (the sayings of Prophet Muhammad), and is banned in most Muslim-majority countries.


On the other hand, the more accepted form of divorce is how the religion has mandated it: the triple talaq (or talaq-ul sunnat). Under this form of triple talaq, the husband says the first 'talaq' and can only say the second time in the next lunar cycle. The wife, meanwhile, has to prepare herself for the three-month 'iddat' period, covering three mestrual cycles. In this duration, the husband can rethink over his decision and re-conciliate with the wife. When the period of iddat expires and the husband does not revoke the talaq either expressly or by consummation, the divorce is considered irrevocable and final.


No, the women have the option of asking for 'khula' in case the marriage breaks down. A woman can divorce her husband by returning the dower (mehr) that she received from her husband.

It should be noted that unlike the dominant definition in Hinduism and in Christianity, Islam looks at marriage not as a sacrament which is eternal, but as a civil contract, which is accepted between the two parties on the basis of mutual consent.


23 August 2017                                          

You may also like...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

5 × 2 =