| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| India's Supreme Court orders protection for talaq couple |
| 2006-04-24 |
| The Supreme Court today directed the Orissa government to give protection to a Muslim couple who have been barred from living together by their community which insists they are divorced. “No community can behave like this in a secular country. Every community has to live in a civilised way,” a three-judge bench headed by Justice Ruma Pal said. The couple, who were told they had lost conjugal rights in July 2003 after the husband allegedly uttered the word talaq thrice when he was drunk, moved the apex court after failing to get relief from Orissa High Court and the National Human Rights Commission. The court today directed the state government to file its response within two weeks. “No one can force them to live separately,” the bench said, when it was pointed out that their community in Bhadrak had ostracised the couple. Nizama Bibi and Ser Mohammad had moved a special leave petition challenging an April 18, 2005, order by the high court refusing to intervene in the matter. The couple ran into trouble after the local community in Bhadrak said they stood divorced as Ser had uttered “talaq” thrice during a quarrel on July 15, 2003. Both Ser and Nizama said they had no recollection of this. They approached a mufti who issued a fatwa on September 9, 2003, saying the talaq did not hold as the husband was drunk. The community, however, approached another mufti who ruled to the contrary on September 29, 2003. As per Muslim personal law, Nizama has to marry another man, consummate the marriage and divorce him before she can remarry Ser and live with him. In view of opposition from the community, the couple obtained a compromise decree from a Cuttack family court to stay together but the order could not be implemented because police refused to help. The petition said Nizama approached the police and the NHRC, but got no relief. With the couple facing a threat to their life, an NGO — Committee for Legal Aid to the Poor — filed a writ petition in the high court, but it was dismissed on April 18, 2005. In their appeal, the couple said the high court had ignored the fact that the case raised an important point of law of public importance. It should have decided if one section of a community could be allowed to interfere with the fundamental rights of individuals, they said. A section of the community was victimising a couple in the name of religion, and there were others being harassed similarly, they said. |
| Posted by:ryuge |
| #1 Every community has to live in a civilised way. Islamists are incapable of living in a civilised way. Their religion prohibits it. |
| Posted by: Thinemp Whimble2412 2006-04-24 13:28 |