Muslims in various cities across India wore black armbands while offering namaz on the occasion of &lsquo;Alvida Jumma&rsquo;, the last Friday of the holy month of Ramzan. Several people were seen wearing black armbands while offering prayers in Lucknow, Hyderabad, and other cities. The donning of black armbands was in adherence to the call for a silent protest by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB). The AIMPLB had urged Muslims across the nation to wear black armbands during the namaz on &lsquo;Alvida Jumma&rsquo;, also referred to as &lsquo;Alvida namaz&rsquo;, as a peaceful protest against the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024.&nbsp; In a post on X, AIMPLB said, &ldquo;It is the responsibility of every Muslim in the country to strongly oppose this bill (Waqf Amendment Bill 2025). The All India Muslim Personal Law Board appeals to all Muslims to wear a black armband while coming to the mosque on Jumu&rsquo;atul Wida as a silent and peaceful expression of grief and protest.&rdquo;&nbsp; The AIMPLB further said that the Waqf Amendment Bill 2025 was &ldquo;a sinister conspiracy aimed at depriving Muslims of their mosques, eidgahs, madrasas, dargahs, khanqahs, graveyards, and charitable institutions.&rdquo;&nbsp;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet publive-iframes-block publive-Twitter-block" contenteditable="false" width="600" height="400" id="PL_blockquote_block-m8sqrgeq-3k993a89-drykmyvk">
An Important Appeal to the Muslims of India Wear a Black Armband on Jumu&rsquo;atul Wida to Protest against Waqf Amendment Bill 2024.<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/IndiaAgainstWaqfBill?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#IndiaAgainstWaqfBill</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RejectWaqfBill?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RejectWaqfBill</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SayNoToWaqfBill?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SayNoToWaqfBill</a> <a href="https://t.co/auwKL9quxi">pic.twitter.com/auwKL9quxi</a>
&mdash; All India Muslim Personal Law Board (@AIMPLB_Official) <a href="https://twitter.com/AIMPLB_Official/status/1905337312445432018?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 27, 2025</a></blockquote>
 It further added, &ldquo;The strong protests by Muslims at Jantar Mantar in Delhi and Dharna Sthal in Patna have at least caused a stir among BJP&rsquo;s allied parties. Now, a massive protest is also scheduled to take place in Vijayawada on March 29, 2025.&rdquo;&nbsp;
Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/yeshu-yeshu-pastor-found-guilty-in-2018-sexual-harassment-case-by-punjab-court-8900478">&lsquo;Yeshu Yeshu pastor&rsquo; found guilty in 2018 sexual harassment case by Punjab court</a> &nbsp; AIMPLB general secretary Maulana Mohammed Fazlur Rahim Mujaddidi issued a video appeal via its X handle in which he urged people to wear a black armband on their right hand when they go for prayers.&nbsp; He urged Muslims to put a black armband on their right hand and share a video of it while also sending it to the online desk of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB).
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet publive-iframes-block publive-Twitter-block" contenteditable="false" width="600" height="400" id="PL_blockquote_block-m8sqs3dg-8x8ymyxy-gf1ddh17">
BIG ANNOUNCEMENT ⭕ वक्फ़ संशोधन बिल के खिलाफ मुस्लिम पर्सनल लॉ बोर्ड का बड़ा ऐलान! रमज़ान के इस आख़री जुमा, जुमातुल विदा को मुसलमान यह काम ज़रूर करें...👇🏻 This Ramazan's Jumma Tul Wida Let us Protest against Waqf Amendment Bill by this method 👇🏻<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/IndiaAgainstWaqfBill?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#IndiaAgainstWaqfBill</a>&hellip; <a href="https://t.co/FPFC0XSZbk">pic.twitter.com/FPFC0XSZbk</a>
&mdash; All India Muslim Personal Law Board (@AIMPLB_Official) <a href="https://twitter.com/AIMPLB_Official/status/1905207873795494016?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 27, 2025</a></blockquote>
 The 1995 Waqf Act, which governs Waqf properties, has faced criticism regarding property mismanagement, corruption, and unauthorised occupations. The proposed amendments introduce a series of changes designed to modernise the Waqf system. Among the key provisions are stricter regulations governing the registration and monitoring of Waqf properties.
Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/mamata-banerjee-heckled-during-oxford-university-speech-questioned-on-rg-rape-murder-case-8899764" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">Mamata Banerjee heckled during Oxford University speech, questioned on RG rape-murder case</a>
In Hyderabad, AIMIM chief and Lok Sabha MP Asaduddin Owaisi, who is also part of the JPC on the Waqf bill, joined in the symbolic protest wearing a black armband while offering prayers.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet publive-iframes-block publive-Twitter-block" contenteditable="false" width="600" height="400" id="PL_blockquote_block-m8sqsvv3-vpgv533q-uqtull0o">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WATCH?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WATCH</a> | Hyderabad | AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi wears 'black band' on his arm supporting the call given by All India Muslim Personal Law Board in protest against the Waqf Amendment Bill <a href="https://t.co/TKPXB4ZTaU">pic.twitter.com/TKPXB4ZTaU</a>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1905520237904065009?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 28, 2025</a></blockquote>
 The AIMPLB&rsquo;s 31-member Action Committee has resolved to adopt all constitutional, legal, and democratic means to oppose the &ldquo;controversial, discriminatory, and damaging&rdquo; bill. The ruling BJP says that the legislation aims to benefit the disadvantaged Muslims while alleging that the 1995 Waqf Act brought by the then Congress government is repressive and regressive and discriminates against the disadvantaged sections of the Muslim community. The Waqf Amendment Bill will empower underprivileged sections of the Muslim community, it says.
Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/self-styled-punjab-pastor-bajinder-singh-assaults-woman-holding-baby-other-staffers-video-goes-viral-8882756" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Self-styled Punjab pastor Bajinder Singh assaults woman with baby, other staffers; video goes viral</a>
The Tamil Nadu Assembly adopted a resolution on Thursday opposing the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024. Chief Minister MK Stalin said in the assembly that the bill discriminates against Muslims. &ldquo;The central government is inserting schemes that are against state rights, culture, and tradition. In India, various cultures, traditions, and languages are present, but they are doing it with the intention of taking revenge on the states. The Waqf (Amendment) bill is against Muslims.&rdquo;&nbsp;

India News: Several people were seen wearing black armbands while offering prayers in Lucknow, Hyderabad, and other cities in adherence to the call for a silent protest by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB).

Muslims in various cities across India wore black armbands while offering namaz on the occasion of ‘Alvida Jumma’, the last Friday of the holy month of Ramzan. Several people were seen wearing black armbands while offering prayers in Lucknow, Hyderabad, and other cities. The donning of black armbands was in adherence to the call for a silent protest by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB). The AIMPLB had urged Muslims across the nation to wear black armbands during the namaz on ‘Alvida Jumma’, also referred to as ‘Alvida namaz’, as a peaceful protest against the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024. In a post on X, AIMPLB said, “It is the responsibility of every Muslim in the country to strongly oppose this bill (Waqf Amendment Bill 2025). The All India Muslim Personal Law Board appeals to all Muslims to wear a black armband while coming to the mosque on Jumu’atul Wida as a silent and peaceful expression of grief and protest.” The AIMPLB further said that the Waqf Amendment Bill 2025 was “a sinister conspiracy aimed at depriving Muslims of their mosques, eidgahs, madrasas, dargahs, khanqahs, graveyards, and charitable institutions.” An Important Appeal to the Muslims of India Wear a Black Armband on Jumu’atul Wida to Protest against Waqf Amendment Bill 2024.#IndiaAgainstWaqfBill#RejectWaqfBill #SayNoToWaqfBill pic.twitter.com/auwKL9quxi — All India Muslim Personal Law Board (@AIMPLB_Official) March 27, 2025 It further added, “The strong protests by Muslims at Jantar Mantar in Delhi and Dharna Sthal in Patna have at least caused a stir among BJP’s allied parties. Now, a massive protest is also scheduled to take place in Vijayawada on March 29, 2025.” Also Read | ‘Yeshu Yeshu pastor’ found guilty in 2018 sexual harassment case by Punjab court AIMPLB general secretary Maulana Mohammed Fazlur Rahim Mujaddidi issued a video appeal via its X handle in which he urged people to wear a black armband on their right hand when they go for prayers. He urged Muslims to put a black armband on their right hand and share a video of it while also sending it to the online desk of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB). BIG ANNOUNCEMENT ⭕ वक्फ़ संशोधन बिल के खिलाफ मुस्लिम पर्सनल लॉ बोर्ड का बड़ा ऐलान! रमज़ान के इस आख़री जुमा, जुमातुल विदा को मुसलमान यह काम ज़रूर करें...👇🏻 This Ramazan's Jumma Tul Wida Let us Protest against Waqf Amendment Bill by this method 👇🏻#IndiaAgainstWaqfBill… pic.twitter.com/FPFC0XSZbk — All India Muslim Personal Law Board (@AIMPLB_Official) March 27, 2025 The 1995 Waqf Act, which governs Waqf properties, has faced criticism regarding property mismanagement, corruption, and unauthorised occupations. The proposed amendments introduce a series of changes designed to modernise the Waqf system. Among the key provisions are stricter regulations governing the registration and monitoring of Waqf properties. Also read | Mamata Banerjee heckled during Oxford University speech, questioned on RG rape-murder case In Hyderabad, AIMIM chief and Lok Sabha MP Asaduddin Owaisi, who is also part of the JPC on the Waqf bill, joined in the symbolic protest wearing a black armband while offering prayers. #WATCH | Hyderabad | AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi wears 'black band' on his arm supporting the call given by All India Muslim Personal Law Board in protest against the Waqf Amendment Bill pic.twitter.com/TKPXB4ZTaU — ANI (@ANI) March 28, 2025 The AIMPLB’s 31-member Action Committee has resolved to adopt all constitutional, legal, and democratic means to oppose the “controversial, discriminatory, and damaging” bill. The ruling BJP says that the legislation aims to benefit the disadvantaged Muslims while alleging that the 1995 Waqf Act brought by the then Congress government is repressive and regressive and discriminates against the disadvantaged sections of the Muslim community. The Waqf Amendment Bill will empower underprivileged sections of the Muslim community, it says. Also Read | Self-styled Punjab pastor Bajinder Singh assaults woman with baby, other staffers; video goes viral The Tamil Nadu Assembly adopted a resolution on Thursday opposing the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024. Chief Minister MK Stalin said in the assembly that the bill discriminates against Muslims. “The central government is inserting schemes that are against state rights, culture, and tradition. In India, various cultures, traditions, and languages are present, but they are doing it with the intention of taking revenge on the states. The Waqf (Amendment) bill is against Muslims.”

Why are Muslims in India wearing black armbands during Alvida namaz?

Iqbal Ansari, one of the petitioners in Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute, on Sunday distanced himself from the decision of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) to seek review of the Supreme Court order in the matter.

"We respect the apex court's ruling. We are Muslims of India and respect the law of the land. We would not go further on this issue," Ansari told ANI here. "Since there are so many litigants in the case, I cannot take guarantee of everyone."

On November 9, a five-judge bench ordered the construction of Ram Temple while directing the government to give five acres of land to build a mosque in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh.

Earlier today, AIMPLB member Zafaryab Jilani announced the decision to file a review petition against the Supreme Court verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit.

"We will file the review petition in the Supreme Court and we will not also accept the 5 acres of land to be given to us on the direction of the apex court, as it is against Sharia," Jilani told media persons in Lucknow.

Iqbal Ansari, one of the petitioners in Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute, on Sunday distanced himself from the decision of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) to seek review of the Supreme Court order in the matter.

Iqbal Ansari, one of the petitioners in Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute, on Sunday distanced himself from the decision of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) to seek review of the Supreme Court order in the matter. "We respect the apex court's ruling. We are Muslims of India and respect the law of the land. We would not go further on this issue," Ansari told ANI here. "Since there are so many litigants in the case, I cannot take guarantee of everyone." On November 9, a five-judge bench ordered the construction of Ram Temple while directing the government to give five acres of land to build a mosque in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh. Earlier today, AIMPLB member Zafaryab Jilani announced the decision to file a review petition against the Supreme Court verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit. "We will file the review petition in the Supreme Court and we will not also accept the 5 acres of land to be given to us on the direction of the apex court, as it is against Sharia," Jilani told media persons in Lucknow.

Plaintiff Iqbal Ansari distances from AIMPLB decision to seek review of Supreme Court ruling in Ayodhya case

Nirmohi Akhara, one of the main parties in the Ayodhya land dispute case, on Sunday convened a high-level meeting here to discuss the verdict of the Supreme Court in the matter and formulate the future course of action.

The meeting chaired by the head of Nirmohi Akhara, Mahant Dinendra Das, was also attended by its Sarpanch Raja Ram Chandra Das here. All Panchs of Nirmohi Akhara were present in the meeting.

"We held a meeting to discuss the Supreme Court verdict in the Ayodhya Ram temple. We welcome the verdict but the Supreme Court did not take a stand on several issues. We also discussed these matters and are formulating a future course of action," the Sarpanch told ANI.

He said that the Nirmohi Akhara has been demanding the construction of a Ram Temple in Ayodhya since the year 1885.

Swamy Ram Suresh Das, who was also present in the meeting said: "We also performed 'Sarju Pujan' and prayed that the temple is constructed without any obstruction."

The Supreme Court had, in its November 9 judgment, directed that representation may be given to Nirmohi Akhara in the central trust to be set up to oversee the contested property in Ayodhya.

The Supreme Court had also directed the Central government to hand over the disputed site at Ayodhya for the construction of a temple and give a suitable plot of land measuring five acres to the Sunni Waqf Board.

Nirmohi Akhara, one of the main parties in the Ayodhya land dispute case, on Sunday convened a high-level meeting here to discuss the verdict of the Supreme Court in the matter and formulate the future course of action.

Nirmohi Akhara, one of the main parties in the Ayodhya land dispute case, on Sunday convened a high-level meeting here to discuss the verdict of the Supreme Court in the matter and formulate the future course of action. The meeting chaired by the head of Nirmohi Akhara, Mahant Dinendra Das, was also attended by its Sarpanch Raja Ram Chandra Das here. All Panchs of Nirmohi Akhara were present in the meeting. "We held a meeting to discuss the Supreme Court verdict in the Ayodhya Ram temple. We welcome the verdict but the Supreme Court did not take a stand on several issues. We also discussed these matters and are formulating a future course of action," the Sarpanch told ANI. He said that the Nirmohi Akhara has been demanding the construction of a Ram Temple in Ayodhya since the year 1885. Swamy Ram Suresh Das, who was also present in the meeting said: "We also performed 'Sarju Pujan' and prayed that the temple is constructed without any obstruction." The Supreme Court had, in its November 9 judgment, directed that representation may be given to Nirmohi Akhara in the central trust to be set up to oversee the contested property in Ayodhya. The Supreme Court had also directed the Central government to hand over the disputed site at Ayodhya for the construction of a temple and give a suitable plot of land measuring five acres to the Sunni Waqf Board.

Nirmohi Akhara convenes meeting to discuss future course of action on Ayodhya verdict

All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on Sunday decided to file a review petition against Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya issue.

The board also rejected the apex court order in which they granted 5 acres of land under Article 142 for a new mosque saying it was against Shariat and Waqf law.

Zafaryab Jilani, who represented the Muslim parties in the Ayodhya title suit has said that the land of the mosque belongs to Allah and under Sharia law, it cannot be given to anybody. Zafaryab Jilani is also secretary of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB).

"We will file the review petition in the Supreme Court and we will not also accept the 5 acres of land to be given to us on the direction of the apex court, as it is against Sharia," said Jilani.

The decision was taken during the Working Committee meeting of the AIMPLB held here.

"In the Supreme Court verdict, such things have been written that will lead to confrontation with each other. According to Sharia, the Masjid remains at the place where it is once built. It is not allowed as per Sharia to accept anything in place of Masjid be it land, money or any other thing adjoining it," said Maulana Rahman while addressing the press conference.

The Supreme Court on Saturday (November 9) directed the Central government to hand over the disputed site at Ayodhya for the construction of a temple and set up a trust for the same.

The apex court further directed the government to give a suitable plot of land measuring five acres to the Sunni Waqf Board.

A five-judge constitution bench presided by Chief Justice Gogoi and comprising Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer passed the order on a batch of petitions against an order of the Allahabad High Court which trifurcated the site between the parties -- Ramlalla Virajman, Sunni Central Waqf Board and Nirmohi Akhara.

A decade-long legal dispute was fought by Hindu Mahasabha, a sect of Hindu monks Nirmohi Akhara and Sunni Waqf Board over 2.77 acres of land in Ayodhya.

(With inputs from ANI)

All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on Sunday decided to file a review petition against Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya issue. The board also rejected the apex court order in which they granted 5 acres of land under Article 142 for a new mosque saying it was against Shariat and Waqf law.

All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on Sunday decided to file a review petition against Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya issue. The board also rejected the apex court order in which they granted 5 acres of land under Article 142 for a new mosque saying it was against Shariat and Waqf law. Zafaryab Jilani, who represented the Muslim parties in the Ayodhya title suit has said that the land of the mosque belongs to Allah and under Sharia law, it cannot be given to anybody. Zafaryab Jilani is also secretary of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB). "We will file the review petition in the Supreme Court and we will not also accept the 5 acres of land to be given to us on the direction of the apex court, as it is against Sharia," said Jilani. The decision was taken during the Working Committee meeting of the AIMPLB held here. "In the Supreme Court verdict, such things have been written that will lead to confrontation with each other. According to Sharia, the Masjid remains at the place where it is once built. It is not allowed as per Sharia to accept anything in place of Masjid be it land, money or any other thing adjoining it," said Maulana Rahman while addressing the press conference. The Supreme Court on Saturday (November 9) directed the Central government to hand over the disputed site at Ayodhya for the construction of a temple and set up a trust for the same. The apex court further directed the government to give a suitable plot of land measuring five acres to the Sunni Waqf Board. A five-judge constitution bench presided by Chief Justice Gogoi and comprising Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer passed the order on a batch of petitions against an order of the Allahabad High Court which trifurcated the site between the parties -- Ramlalla Virajman, Sunni Central Waqf Board and Nirmohi Akhara. A decade-long legal dispute was fought by Hindu Mahasabha, a sect of Hindu monks Nirmohi Akhara and Sunni Waqf Board over 2.77 acres of land in Ayodhya. (With inputs from ANI)

Ayodhya Judgement: Muslim Law Board to file a review petition, refuses alternative 5-acre plot

Indian Supreme Court delivers the judgement on the Ayodhya dispute case. Zafaryab Jilani from the AIMPLB said that they're not satisfied with the verdict'. WION also speaks to Ramakant Gaur, a Constitutional Lawyer from New Delhi to get his perspective on the verdict of Supreme Court for better clarity.

Top court delivers Ayodhya dispute judgement, 'AIMPLB not satisfied with verdict'

All India Muslim Personal Law Board Member (AIMPLB) on Saturday said that although they respect the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/ram-temple-to-be-built-on-disputed-land-separate-plot-of-land-for-mosque-260935">Supreme Court's verdict on Ayodhya land dispute</a>, they are not satisfied with it.&nbsp;

Sunni Waqf Board's Zafaryab Jilani said that a review petition will be filed "if our committee agrees on it".&nbsp;

"It is our right and it is in Supreme Court's rules as well," he added, also urging people to maintain peace and calm and not to carry out any form of demonstration anywhere.&nbsp;

"We respect the judgement but we are not satisfied, we will decide further course of action," Jilani said in a press conference today.

The Supreme Court on Saturday directed the Central government to give five acres of suitable land to Sunni Waqf Board and also make necessary arrangements for the construction of the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/be-it-ram-bhakti-or-rahim-bhakti-it-is-imperative-we-strengthen-spirit-of-rashtra-bhakti-modi-260949">temple at the disputed site</a> by forming a trust.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Zafaryab Jilani, All India Muslim Personal Law Board: We will file a review petition if our committee agrees on it. It is our right and it is in Supreme Court's rules as well. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AyodhyaJudgment?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AyodhyaJudgment</a> <a href="https://t.co/ICu8y7fOzI">https://t.co/ICu8y7fOzI</a> <a href="https://t.co/iAoOIcjMTz">pic.twitter.com/iAoOIcjMTz</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1193055245569413120?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 9, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"Central government shall form in three to four months a scheme for setting up of a trust. They shall make necessary arrangements for the management of trust and construction of the temple," Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said while reading out the verdict.

He said that the possession of the inner and outer courtyard shall be handed over to the trust.

"A suitable plot of land measuring five-acre shall be handed over to Sunni Waqf Board," said the apex court.

A five-judge constitution bench presided by Chief Justice Gogoi pronounced the verdict on a batch of petitions against an order of the Allahabad High Court which trifurcated the site between the parties -- Ramlalla Virajman, Sunni Central Waqf Board and Nirmohi Akhara.

A decade-long legal dispute was being fought by right-wing party Hindu Mahasabha, a sect of Hindu monks Nirmohi Akhara and Muslim Waqf Board over 2.77 acres of land in Ayodhya. The dispute is expected to come to an end with the decision of the top court.&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

All India Muslim Personal Law Board Member (AIMPLB) on Saturday said that although they respect the Supreme Court's verdict on Ayodhya land dispute, they are not satisfied with it.

All India Muslim Personal Law Board Member (AIMPLB) on Saturday said that although they respect the Supreme Court's verdict on Ayodhya land dispute, they are not satisfied with it. Sunni Waqf Board's Zafaryab Jilani said that a review petition will be filed "if our committee agrees on it". "It is our right and it is in Supreme Court's rules as well," he added, also urging people to maintain peace and calm and not to carry out any form of demonstration anywhere. "We respect the judgement but we are not satisfied, we will decide further course of action," Jilani said in a press conference today. The Supreme Court on Saturday directed the Central government to give five acres of suitable land to Sunni Waqf Board and also make necessary arrangements for the construction of the temple at the disputed site by forming a trust. Zafaryab Jilani, All India Muslim Personal Law Board: We will file a review petition if our committee agrees on it. It is our right and it is in Supreme Court's rules as well. #AyodhyaJudgment https://t.co/ICu8y7fOzI pic.twitter.com/iAoOIcjMTz — ANI (@ANI) November 9, 2019 × "Central government shall form in three to four months a scheme for setting up of a trust. They shall make necessary arrangements for the management of trust and construction of the temple," Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said while reading out the verdict. He said that the possession of the inner and outer courtyard shall be handed over to the trust. "A suitable plot of land measuring five-acre shall be handed over to Sunni Waqf Board," said the apex court. A five-judge constitution bench presided by Chief Justice Gogoi pronounced the verdict on a batch of petitions against an order of the Allahabad High Court which trifurcated the site between the parties -- Ramlalla Virajman, Sunni Central Waqf Board and Nirmohi Akhara. A decade-long legal dispute was being fought by right-wing party Hindu Mahasabha, a sect of Hindu monks Nirmohi Akhara and Muslim Waqf Board over 2.77 acres of land in Ayodhya. The dispute is expected to come to an end with the decision of the top court.

Respect Supreme Court's verdict but not satisfied: AIMPLB on Ayodhya verdict

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has called an emergency meeting of its working committee in Lucknow on Sunday morning to discuss the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/a-wion-perspective-ayodhyas-temple-of-harmony-7163">Ayodhya</a> issue.

All the 51 members of the committee are expected to be present in the meeting which is likely to be joined by representatives of the Sunni Central Waqf Board.

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/ayodhya-case-supreme-court-orders-mediation-202104">Supreme Court-appointed mediation committee</a> for resolution of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute held its first sitting on Wednesday (March 13) and heard all parties who attended the proceedings.

The panel, headed by former apex court judge F M Ibrahim&nbsp;Kalifulla, had directed that there should not be any reporting of the mediation proceedings in the print or other media, pointing out the views expressed by the top court.

On March 8, the Supreme Court had referred the land dispute case for court-appointed and monitored mediation.&nbsp;

A five-judge Constitution bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, had said that the mediation proceedings will be held in Faizabad in Uttar Pradesh and the state government will provide the mediators with all facilities.

The bench was hearing appeals against the September 30, 2010 verdict of the Allahabad High Court which ordered a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acres of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya between the Nirmohi Akhara sect, the Sunni Central Waqf Board, Uttar Pradesh and Ramlalla Virajman.&nbsp;

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has called an emergency meeting of its working committee in Lucknow on Sunday morning to discuss the Ayodhya issue.

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has called an emergency meeting of its working committee in Lucknow on Sunday morning to discuss the Ayodhya issue. All the 51 members of the committee are expected to be present in the meeting which is likely to be joined by representatives of the Sunni Central Waqf Board. The Supreme Court-appointed mediation committee for resolution of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute held its first sitting on Wednesday (March 13) and heard all parties who attended the proceedings. The panel, headed by former apex court judge F M Ibrahim Kalifulla, had directed that there should not be any reporting of the mediation proceedings in the print or other media, pointing out the views expressed by the top court. On March 8, the Supreme Court had referred the land dispute case for court-appointed and monitored mediation. A five-judge Constitution bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, had said that the mediation proceedings will be held in Faizabad in Uttar Pradesh and the state government will provide the mediators with all facilities. The bench was hearing appeals against the September 30, 2010 verdict of the Allahabad High Court which ordered a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acres of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya between the Nirmohi Akhara sect, the Sunni Central Waqf Board, Uttar Pradesh and Ramlalla Virajman.

AIMPLB calls emergency meeting for Ayodhya land dispute

Art of Living founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar today renewed his appeal to the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) to consider an out-of-court settlement to the Ram Janmabhoomi row, saying he feared a &quot;large-scale&quot; communal flare up if the case was settled by a court or through legislation.

In an open letter to the AIMPLB members, he said going through the court was a loss for both Hindus and Muslims and an out-of-court settlement would be a &quot;win-win situation&quot; for both the communities.

&quot;I urge the leaders of both faiths to take this action seriously. Otherwise, we are pushing our country to the brink of a civil war,&quot; said Ravi Shankar, who has been making persistent mediation efforts, meeting Muslim and Hindu leaders, to find a solution to the dispute.

He gave four possible situations - the court giving away the land to the Muslims, awarding the land to the Hindus, upholding the Allahabad High Court order that says there should be a mosque built on one acre whilst the remaining 60 acres be utilized to build the temple and Parliament passing a legislation.

&quot;In all the four options, either through the court or through the government, the result will be devastating for the nation in general and the Muslim community in particular,&quot; he said.

Ravi Shankar said that the best solution would be an out-of-court settlement, in which the Muslim bodies come forward and gift one acre of land to the Hindus, who, in turn, would gift five acres of land nearby to the Muslims to build a bigger mosque.

He also told the AIMPLB leaders that Islam permitted the shifting of the mosque to another location and that cleric Maulana Salman Nadvi and many other Muslim scholars had endorsed it.

Ravi Shankar, however, said, &quot;Muslims are not surrendering this land to the people who demolished the Babri Masjid or to a particular organization.&quot;

&quot;On the contrary, they are gifting it to the people of India. They must keep this in their minds and spirit. It is only reconciliation and an expression of their broad-mindedness, benevolence, magnanimity, and goodwill.&quot;&nbsp;

The Art of Living founder said he feared a large-scale communal flare up if the case was settled by a court

Art of Living founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar today renewed his appeal to the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) to consider an out-of-court settlement to the Ram Janmabhoomi row, saying he feared a "large-scale" communal flare up if the case was settled by a court or through legislation. In an open letter to the AIMPLB members, he said going through the court was a loss for both Hindus and Muslims and an out-of-court settlement would be a "win-win situation" for both the communities. "I urge the leaders of both faiths to take this action seriously. Otherwise, we are pushing our country to the brink of a civil war," said Ravi Shankar, who has been making persistent mediation efforts, meeting Muslim and Hindu leaders, to find a solution to the dispute. He gave four possible situations - the court giving away the land to the Muslims, awarding the land to the Hindus, upholding the Allahabad High Court order that says there should be a mosque built on one acre whilst the remaining 60 acres be utilized to build the temple and Parliament passing a legislation. "In all the four options, either through the court or through the government, the result will be devastating for the nation in general and the Muslim community in particular," he said. Ravi Shankar said that the best solution would be an out-of-court settlement, in which the Muslim bodies come forward and gift one acre of land to the Hindus, who, in turn, would gift five acres of land nearby to the Muslims to build a bigger mosque. He also told the AIMPLB leaders that Islam permitted the shifting of the mosque to another location and that cleric Maulana Salman Nadvi and many other Muslim scholars had endorsed it. Ravi Shankar, however, said, "Muslims are not surrendering this land to the people who demolished the Babri Masjid or to a particular organization." "On the contrary, they are gifting it to the people of India. They must keep this in their minds and spirit. It is only reconciliation and an expression of their broad-mindedness, benevolence, magnanimity, and goodwill."

Ayodhya row: Sri Sri renews appeal to AIMPLB to consider out of court settlement

The<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/babri-masjid-will-remain-mosque-till-eternity-aimplb-32515"> All India Muslim Personal Law Board&rsquo;s (AIMPLB) </a>member on Sunday informed that the committee has decided to remove Moulana Salman Husaini Nadvi&rsquo;s from the board&nbsp;after he suggested shifting the site of <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/babri-masjid-ramjanmabhoomi-dispute-a-timeline-25799">Babri mosque</a> from Ayodhya.

However, Nadvi has said that&nbsp;&quot;hardliners&quot; had hijacked the board, which forced him to distance himself from their &quot;official&quot; stance on the Ayodhya dispute, reports said.&nbsp;

He had suggested that the board should make the final decision and not leave it to the court as they could not come up with a verdict in 25 years.&nbsp;

Nadvi was expelled for going against the decision of the organisation, which today stated that its position on the issue of building a mosque in Ayodhya remains unchanged.

A committee was formed by the board to look into the matter. With the rift out in the open, the board had earlier hinted that Nadvi would be removed from the board.

&quot;Committee announced AIMPLB Board will continue with its old stand that Mosque cannot be gifted, sold or shifted. Because Salman Nadvi has gone against this unanimous stand, he has been expelled,&quot; AIMPLB member Qasim Ilyas said.

Earlier, talking to the media, Nadvi had threatened to remove AIMPLB chairman Zafayb Jilani from Sunni Waqf Board&rsquo;s lawyer.

Jilani, to this, said, &ldquo;He can do whatever he wants. We have been fighting since 1986, the time when he (Nadvi) was not included in the fight (Babri Masjid).&rdquo;

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar expressed surprise at the move on Twitter.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Maulana Salman Husaini Nadwi&rsquo;s expulsion from the AIMPLB comes as a surprise, as several members of the board have met with me &amp; expressed their commitment to foster amity amongst Hindus &amp; Muslims &amp; to peacefully resolve this issue.
&mdash; Sri Sri Ravi Shankar (@SriSri) <a href="https://twitter.com/SriSri/status/962629920131346432?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 11, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

On February 9, Maulana Salman Husaini Nadvi spoke to ANI about his meeting with Sri Sri Ravi Shankar where he extended support to the construction of Ram temple and said that their priority is to join hearts of people.

He also hinted at an out of court settlement by saying, &ldquo;The courts do not join people&rsquo;s heart as the verdict is always in favour of one and against the other.&rdquo;

Referring to Sri Sri Ravi Shankar&rsquo;s issue, Jilani said that they cannot give the mosque to anyone.

Nadvi, who teaches at the Islamic seminary Nadwatul Ulema or Nadwa Madrassa in Lucknow, has drawn flak from other senior members of the board who met at Hyderabad.

The Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute is a century-old issue between Hindus and Muslims over a piece of land, which is claimed by the former to be the birthplace of Hindu Lord Ram and thus entitled for construction of a Ram Temple.

The<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/babri-masjid-demolition-case-cbi-court-frames-charges-against-advani-manohar-joshi-uma-bharti-16223"> Babri Masjid</a>, built in 1528-29 CE, was demolished by Hindu Karsevaks on December 6, 1992 in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, which caused massive riots across the country.

The case is now pending in the Supreme Court.

On Thursday, the three-judge Supreme Court bench fixed March 14 as the next date of hearing in Ayodhya case as some of the documents and translations were yet to be filed before the apex court.

However, Nadvi has said that 'hardliners' had hijacked the board, which forced him to distance himself from their 'official' stance on the Ayodhya dispute, reports said

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board’s (AIMPLB) member on Sunday informed that the committee has decided to remove Moulana Salman Husaini Nadvi’s from the board after he suggested shifting the site of Babri mosque from Ayodhya. However, Nadvi has said that "hardliners" had hijacked the board, which forced him to distance himself from their "official" stance on the Ayodhya dispute, reports said. He had suggested that the board should make the final decision and not leave it to the court as they could not come up with a verdict in 25 years. Nadvi was expelled for going against the decision of the organisation, which today stated that its position on the issue of building a mosque in Ayodhya remains unchanged. A committee was formed by the board to look into the matter. With the rift out in the open, the board had earlier hinted that Nadvi would be removed from the board. "Committee announced AIMPLB Board will continue with its old stand that Mosque cannot be gifted, sold or shifted. Because Salman Nadvi has gone against this unanimous stand, he has been expelled," AIMPLB member Qasim Ilyas said. Earlier, talking to the media, Nadvi had threatened to remove AIMPLB chairman Zafayb Jilani from Sunni Waqf Board’s lawyer. Jilani, to this, said, “He can do whatever he wants. We have been fighting since 1986, the time when he (Nadvi) was not included in the fight (Babri Masjid).” Sri Sri Ravi Shankar expressed surprise at the move on Twitter. Maulana Salman Husaini Nadwi’s expulsion from the AIMPLB comes as a surprise, as several members of the board have met with me & expressed their commitment to foster amity amongst Hindus & Muslims & to peacefully resolve this issue. — Sri Sri Ravi Shankar (@SriSri) February 11, 2018 × On February 9, Maulana Salman Husaini Nadvi spoke to ANI about his meeting with Sri Sri Ravi Shankar where he extended support to the construction of Ram temple and said that their priority is to join hearts of people. He also hinted at an out of court settlement by saying, “The courts do not join people’s heart as the verdict is always in favour of one and against the other.” Referring to Sri Sri Ravi Shankar’s issue, Jilani said that they cannot give the mosque to anyone. Nadvi, who teaches at the Islamic seminary Nadwatul Ulema or Nadwa Madrassa in Lucknow, has drawn flak from other senior members of the board who met at Hyderabad. The Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute is a century-old issue between Hindus and Muslims over a piece of land, which is claimed by the former to be the birthplace of Hindu Lord Ram and thus entitled for construction of a Ram Temple. The Babri Masjid, built in 1528-29 CE, was demolished by Hindu Karsevaks on December 6, 1992 in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, which caused massive riots across the country. The case is now pending in the Supreme Court. On Thursday, the three-judge Supreme Court bench fixed March 14 as the next date of hearing in Ayodhya case as some of the documents and translations were yet to be filed before the apex court.

Hardliners have hijacked board: Cleric expelled by AIMPLB after saying Babri Masjid site can be shifted

Babri Masjid will remain a mosque till eternity and Muslims can never exchange land for the masjid, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) said here today.

In a statement issued on the concluding day of its 26th plenary, the board said Babri masjid is an essential part of faith in Islam and Muslims can never &quot;abdicate&quot; the Masjid.

&quot;Babri Masjid is an essential part of faith in Islam and Muslims can never abdicate the Masjid nor can they exchange land for Masjid or gift the Masjid land. Babri Masjid is a Masjid and it shall remain a Masjid till eternity. By demolishing Babri Masjid, it never loses its identity as a masjid. And according to Shariah, it always remains a Masjid,&quot; the statement said.

AIMPLB chief Maulana Rabey Hasani Nadvi presided over the three-day meet which was attended by 400 members and special invitees from different spheres of life including ulemas (clergy), intellectuals, social and political personalities.

Also read:<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/aimplb-expells-cleric-for-suggesting-shifting-babri-mosque-32508">&nbsp;&#39;Hardliners&#39; hijacked board, forced me to distance from &#39;official&#39; stance: Nadvi after expulsion</a>

The meet discussed and decided to protect the Islamic Shariah.

The board stressed the struggle for the reconstruction of the Babri Masjid would continue.

&quot;Without any doubt, we make it clear that the struggle for the reconstruction of Babri Masjid continues and the appeal in the Supreme Court is being fought rigorously with all the resources available at the disposal of the board,&quot;?the statement said.

The AIMPLB further said the country&#39;s topmost lawyers are appearing in the apex court in the case on behalf of Muslims.

On the triple talaq issue, the board said a bill moved by the Centre to criminalise the practice is &quot;anti-women&quot; and is against the Shariah and the Constitution.

&quot;The Talaq-e-Biddat bill moved by the central government is anti-women. It will create more difficulties for women. It is against Shariah and it is against the Constitution. The efforts made by the Board will continue to stop this bill in the Rajya Sabha,&quot; the statement said.

The AIMPLB will start a country-wide awareness campaign against the bill and will also coordinate with Opposition parties that are against the bill,?it said.

The AIMPLB also decided that state-wide committees and district-level committees will be formed under the aegis of the central body for the purpose.

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, which criminalises instant talaq and provides for up to three years of imprisonment for Muslim men if they indulge in it, has already been passed in the Lok Sabha, but it is yet to get a nod in the Rajya Sabha, where the BJP-led NDA lacks majority.

In the politically sensitive Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid case, the Supreme Court is currently hearing final arguments.

In its ruling on September 30, 2010, the Allahabad High Court ordered a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acres of the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi site, giving a third each to the Nirmohi Akhara, the Sunni Central Wakf Board of Uttar Pradesh, and Ramlalla Virajman, the idol of the child Ram placed there.&nbsp;

'Babri Masjid is an essential part of faith in Islam and Muslims can never abdicate the Masjid nor can they exchange land for Masjid or gift the Masjid land. Babri Masjid is a Masjid and it shall remain a Masjid till eternity,' the AIMPLB said

Babri Masjid will remain a mosque till eternity and Muslims can never exchange land for the masjid, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) said here today. In a statement issued on the concluding day of its 26th plenary, the board said Babri masjid is an essential part of faith in Islam and Muslims can never "abdicate" the Masjid. "Babri Masjid is an essential part of faith in Islam and Muslims can never abdicate the Masjid nor can they exchange land for Masjid or gift the Masjid land. Babri Masjid is a Masjid and it shall remain a Masjid till eternity. By demolishing Babri Masjid, it never loses its identity as a masjid. And according to Shariah, it always remains a Masjid," the statement said. AIMPLB chief Maulana Rabey Hasani Nadvi presided over the three-day meet which was attended by 400 members and special invitees from different spheres of life including ulemas (clergy), intellectuals, social and political personalities. Also read: 'Hardliners' hijacked board, forced me to distance from 'official' stance: Nadvi after expulsion The meet discussed and decided to protect the Islamic Shariah. The board stressed the struggle for the reconstruction of the Babri Masjid would continue. "Without any doubt, we make it clear that the struggle for the reconstruction of Babri Masjid continues and the appeal in the Supreme Court is being fought rigorously with all the resources available at the disposal of the board,"?the statement said. The AIMPLB further said the country's topmost lawyers are appearing in the apex court in the case on behalf of Muslims. On the triple talaq issue, the board said a bill moved by the Centre to criminalise the practice is "anti-women" and is against the Shariah and the Constitution. "The Talaq-e-Biddat bill moved by the central government is anti-women. It will create more difficulties for women. It is against Shariah and it is against the Constitution. The efforts made by the Board will continue to stop this bill in the Rajya Sabha," the statement said. The AIMPLB will start a country-wide awareness campaign against the bill and will also coordinate with Opposition parties that are against the bill,?it said. The AIMPLB also decided that state-wide committees and district-level committees will be formed under the aegis of the central body for the purpose. The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, which criminalises instant talaq and provides for up to three years of imprisonment for Muslim men if they indulge in it, has already been passed in the Lok Sabha, but it is yet to get a nod in the Rajya Sabha, where the BJP-led NDA lacks majority. In the politically sensitive Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid case, the Supreme Court is currently hearing final arguments. In its ruling on September 30, 2010, the Allahabad High Court ordered a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acres of the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi site, giving a third each to the Nirmohi Akhara, the Sunni Central Wakf Board of Uttar Pradesh, and Ramlalla Virajman, the idol of the child Ram placed there.

Babri Masjid will remain mosque till eternity: AIMPLB

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) said on Thursday that even though they may not be opposed to the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/triple-talaq-all-you-need-to-know-19324">Triple Talaq</a> Bill but are raising objections on the major flaws which are against fundamentals rights of Muslim men and women, saying that it is a big &quot;dhoka.&quot;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Muslim Personal Law Board is not opposing the Triple Talaq Bill, but raising objections on the major flaws which are against fundamental rights of Muslim men &amp; women. The Bill is big &#39;Dhoka&#39;: AIMPLB.
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/961497299489886208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 8, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

The<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/one-million-indian-muslims-mostly-women-sign-petition-against-triple-talaq-13524"> Triple Talaq bill,</a> called The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, has already been passed in the Lok Sabha and is awaiting a nod from the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/triple-talaq-bill-tabled-in-rajya-sabha-28436">Rajya Sabha.</a>

The AIMPLB has maintained that it is not against the practice of triple talaq, but it has opposed the proposed legislation saying it is an interference in Muslim personal law. The Board has, however, faced criticism for failing to bring reforms in personal laws.

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) is all set to introduce a new clause in its &quot;Model Nikahnama&quot; or marriage contract, where the groom will have to pledge in writing that he will not give instant divorce to his wife.&nbsp;

&quot;Yes... we are making a provision in the model nikahnama (Islamic marriage contract) in which there will be column - &#39;I will not give triple talaq&#39;. Once during nikah (marriage) this column is ticked, one will not be able to give triple talaq,&quot; AIMPLB spokesman Maulana Khalil-ur-Rehman Sajjad Nomani said in Lucknow.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/triple-talaq-bill-gets-mixed-reactions-who-said-what-27993">Triple talaq bill gets mixed reactions: Who said what </a>

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) would discuss the new model as well as future course of action on key issues during a meeting in Hyderabad which will go on for three days from February 9-11 which will include over 600 Muslic scholars from across the country.&nbsp;

In August, the Supreme Court struck down the controversial Islamic practice of instant divorce or &#39;talaq- e-biddat&#39; as arbitrary and unconstitutional 
The government later brought the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill which was passed by the Lok Sabha on December 28. It seeks to declare instant triple a criminal offence with a provision of up to three years in jail for the husband.

The Triple Talaq bill, called The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, has already been passed in the Lok Sabha and is awaiting a nod from the Rajya Sabha

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) said on Thursday that even though they may not be opposed to the Triple Talaq Bill but are raising objections on the major flaws which are against fundamentals rights of Muslim men and women, saying that it is a big "dhoka." Muslim Personal Law Board is not opposing the Triple Talaq Bill, but raising objections on the major flaws which are against fundamental rights of Muslim men & women. The Bill is big 'Dhoka': AIMPLB. — ANI (@ANI) February 8, 2018 × The Triple Talaq bill, called The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, has already been passed in the Lok Sabha and is awaiting a nod from the Rajya Sabha. The AIMPLB has maintained that it is not against the practice of triple talaq, but it has opposed the proposed legislation saying it is an interference in Muslim personal law. The Board has, however, faced criticism for failing to bring reforms in personal laws. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) is all set to introduce a new clause in its "Model Nikahnama" or marriage contract, where the groom will have to pledge in writing that he will not give instant divorce to his wife. "Yes... we are making a provision in the model nikahnama (Islamic marriage contract) in which there will be column - 'I will not give triple talaq'. Once during nikah (marriage) this column is ticked, one will not be able to give triple talaq," AIMPLB spokesman Maulana Khalil-ur-Rehman Sajjad Nomani said in Lucknow. Also read: Triple talaq bill gets mixed reactions: Who said what The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) would discuss the new model as well as future course of action on key issues during a meeting in Hyderabad which will go on for three days from February 9-11 which will include over 600 Muslic scholars from across the country. In August, the Supreme Court struck down the controversial Islamic practice of instant divorce or 'talaq- e-biddat' as arbitrary and unconstitutional The government later brought the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill which was passed by the Lok Sabha on December 28. It seeks to declare instant triple a criminal offence with a provision of up to three years in jail for the husband.

Triple Talaq bill a big 'dhoka,' says All India Muslim Personal Law Board

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, popularly known as the Triple Talaq Bill, which has been tabled today in the Rajya Sabha for its consideration and clearance, has generated a lot of heat in the political and the media space over the past few days.&nbsp; The bill, which is being touted as the most progressive legislation for the emancipation of Muslim Women in India, is also one of the most polarising one within the community where it divides the population in nearly two halves broadly along the line of the sex of the members. While most of the women, including the All India Muslim Women Personal Law Board (AIMWPLB), are supporting the bill, the men including the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) are pitted against it.

The AIMPLB came up with a resolution opposing the Bill where it termed the legislation to be &ldquo;against the welfare of Muslim women at large&rdquo; and believed that &ldquo;it shall harm the interest of Muslim Women and the family&rdquo; because in its opinion, the Bill fails to take into consideration the &ldquo;adverse consequences of the proposed law and welfare of the women and children pursuant to a &lsquo;non effective&rsquo; Talaq.&rdquo;&nbsp;

It is pertinent to mention that the Bill has been conceived in the aftermath of a decision by the Supreme Court in August this year in the famous case of Shaiara Bano vs Union of India &amp; Others, wherein the Court had set aside the practice of Instant Triple Talaq among the Muslims as unconstitutional. While putting forth the Bill, a statement of &lsquo;Objects and Reasons of the Bill&rsquo; was also brought up by the Ministry of Law that explained, &ldquo;There is a need for State action to give effect to the order of the Supreme Court and to redress the grievances of victims of illegal divorce. In order to prevent the continued harassment being meted out to the hapless married Muslim women due to Talaq-e-Biddat, urgent suitable legislation is necessary to give some relief to them&hellip;The legislation would help in ensuring the larger Constitutional goals of gender justice and gender equality of married Muslim women and would help subserve their fundamental rights of non-discrimination and empowerment.&rdquo;

However, the legislation is a must and its enactment urgent. The government revealed that even after the Supreme Court set aside instant triple talaq in August this year, the practice didn&rsquo;t stop and more than 60 cases of instant triple talaq were reported in the country since then. Hence, its clear that such a practice isn&rsquo;t going to stop unless a strong law is put into place.

Shaista Amber, the President of the AIMWPLB had led a Muslim Women delegation to the Prime Minister Narendra Modi to press for a bill on August 8 this year. After the meeting, she had told the media, &ldquo;We proposed punishment and penalty for those who do not give equal right to women. I am thankful to the government for acting on the issue. AIMPLB is opposing the bill and abusing the rights of women.&rdquo; While launching a broadside against the AIMPLB, she had fulminated - &ldquo;Why don&rsquo;t they (The AIMPLB members) consider Muslim women as equal partners? Why do they want to create a communal feeling among the Muslims when the society is going for reforms? Why are they saying the bill would promote interference in religious matters? Why do they want to protect such men who use women and abandon them at their will?&rdquo;

The stand of the AIMPLB is terribly flawed on the matter and they no longer carry a locus standi on the proposed Bill from moral as well as a legal perspective.

First, the AIMPLB was an opposing party in the Shaira Bano case in the Supreme Court, which had demolished its arguments on Triple Talaq issue. The AIMPLB had constantly opposed the government&#39;s stand in the Triple Talaq case and hence, they&#39;re now a defeated party. Thus, they carry no legal and moral standing to dictate the government on the provisions of the proposed law anymore.

Second, their opposition to criminalising the offenders of Triple Talaq or suggestion to reduce the punishment terms is not logical. The whole idea to put forth this legislation is to stop instant triple talaq and the same can&#39;t happen unless a strong deterrence is put into place. The said deterrence can happen only through a cognizable and non-bailable provision. Anything below that would defeat the purpose. The Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987 not only criminalized Sati system but had also provided for life imprisonment or death penalty for the abettors of the crime which served the required deterrence in Sati cases. Hence, any diluted punishment wouldn&#39;t solve the purpose.&nbsp;

Thirdly, by opposing the inclusion of &quot;or any similar forms of talaq&quot; in the definition of the Bill, the AIMPLB is trying nothing but attempting a back door legitimacy plan for other similar provisions of Talaq, like Talaq-e-bain, which is even more dangerous.

Talaq-e-bain occurs when a husband speaks to his wife about his intention to no longer live with her, though not clearly speaking the word &lsquo;Talaq&rsquo;; the husband may express his intention with or without the motive of Talaq. If the intention to live separate was made without the motive of Talaq, the same will not happen. However, if the intention was said with the motive of Talaq, the same will be considered done and the wife will become haram to her husband from that point onward. Talaq-e-bain is instant and it doesn&rsquo;t require a man to speak the word &lsquo;talaq&rsquo; thrice.

Talaq-e-bain is also not supported by Quran or any major Hadith and if the same is left unstopped, it would give a leeway to Muslims to divorce their women instantly without explicitly saying &#39;talaq&#39; three times, and thus escaping the noose of the proposed law. It&#39;s important to see through the AIMPLB game plan.

Thus, if the government wants to achieve the goal of ensuring gender justice and emancipating the Muslim women from the oppression of their men then it&rsquo;s imperative that all non-Quranic forms of Talaq practices must be outlawed and strong punitive measures must be legislated to act as an effective deterrence against such misogynistic practices.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL).

The AIMPLB carry no legal and moral standing to dictate the government on the provisions of the proposed law anymore

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, popularly known as the Triple Talaq Bill, which has been tabled today in the Rajya Sabha for its consideration and clearance, has generated a lot of heat in the political and the media space over the past few days. The bill, which is being touted as the most progressive legislation for the emancipation of Muslim Women in India, is also one of the most polarising one within the community where it divides the population in nearly two halves broadly along the line of the sex of the members. While most of the women, including the All India Muslim Women Personal Law Board (AIMWPLB), are supporting the bill, the men including the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) are pitted against it. The AIMPLB came up with a resolution opposing the Bill where it termed the legislation to be “against the welfare of Muslim women at large” and believed that “it shall harm the interest of Muslim Women and the family” because in its opinion, the Bill fails to take into consideration the “adverse consequences of the proposed law and welfare of the women and children pursuant to a ‘non effective’ Talaq.” It is pertinent to mention that the Bill has been conceived in the aftermath of a decision by the Supreme Court in August this year in the famous case of Shaiara Bano vs Union of India & Others, wherein the Court had set aside the practice of Instant Triple Talaq among the Muslims as unconstitutional. While putting forth the Bill, a statement of ‘Objects and Reasons of the Bill’ was also brought up by the Ministry of Law that explained, “There is a need for State action to give effect to the order of the Supreme Court and to redress the grievances of victims of illegal divorce. In order to prevent the continued harassment being meted out to the hapless married Muslim women due to Talaq-e-Biddat, urgent suitable legislation is necessary to give some relief to them…The legislation would help in ensuring the larger Constitutional goals of gender justice and gender equality of married Muslim women and would help subserve their fundamental rights of non-discrimination and empowerment.” However, the legislation is a must and its enactment urgent. The government revealed that even after the Supreme Court set aside instant triple talaq in August this year, the practice didn’t stop and more than 60 cases of instant triple talaq were reported in the country since then. Hence, its clear that such a practice isn’t going to stop unless a strong law is put into place. Shaista Amber, the President of the AIMWPLB had led a Muslim Women delegation to the Prime Minister Narendra Modi to press for a bill on August 8 this year. After the meeting, she had told the media, “We proposed punishment and penalty for those who do not give equal right to women. I am thankful to the government for acting on the issue. AIMPLB is opposing the bill and abusing the rights of women.” While launching a broadside against the AIMPLB, she had fulminated - “Why don’t they (The AIMPLB members) consider Muslim women as equal partners? Why do they want to create a communal feeling among the Muslims when the society is going for reforms? Why are they saying the bill would promote interference in religious matters? Why do they want to protect such men who use women and abandon them at their will?” The stand of the AIMPLB is terribly flawed on the matter and they no longer carry a locus standi on the proposed Bill from moral as well as a legal perspective. First, the AIMPLB was an opposing party in the Shaira Bano case in the Supreme Court, which had demolished its arguments on Triple Talaq issue. The AIMPLB had constantly opposed the government's stand in the Triple Talaq case and hence, they're now a defeated party. Thus, they carry no legal and moral standing to dictate the government on the provisions of the proposed law anymore. Second, their opposition to criminalising the offenders of Triple Talaq or suggestion to reduce the punishment terms is not logical. The whole idea to put forth this legislation is to stop instant triple talaq and the same can't happen unless a strong deterrence is put into place. The said deterrence can happen only through a cognizable and non-bailable provision. Anything below that would defeat the purpose. The Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987 not only criminalized Sati system but had also provided for life imprisonment or death penalty for the abettors of the crime which served the required deterrence in Sati cases. Hence, any diluted punishment wouldn't solve the purpose. Thirdly, by opposing the inclusion of "or any similar forms of talaq" in the definition of the Bill, the AIMPLB is trying nothing but attempting a back door legitimacy plan for other similar provisions of Talaq, like Talaq-e-bain, which is even more dangerous. Talaq-e-bain occurs when a husband speaks to his wife about his intention to no longer live with her, though not clearly speaking the word ‘Talaq’; the husband may express his intention with or without the motive of Talaq. If the intention to live separate was made without the motive of Talaq, the same will not happen. However, if the intention was said with the motive of Talaq, the same will be considered done and the wife will become haram to her husband from that point onward. Talaq-e-bain is instant and it doesn’t require a man to speak the word ‘talaq’ thrice. Talaq-e-bain is also not supported by Quran or any major Hadith and if the same is left unstopped, it would give a leeway to Muslims to divorce their women instantly without explicitly saying 'talaq' three times, and thus escaping the noose of the proposed law. It's important to see through the AIMPLB game plan. Thus, if the government wants to achieve the goal of ensuring gender justice and emancipating the Muslim women from the oppression of their men then it’s imperative that all non-Quranic forms of Talaq practices must be outlawed and strong punitive measures must be legislated to act as an effective deterrence against such misogynistic practices. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL).

Opinion: Why objections of AIMPLB on Triple Talaq is not valid

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill 2017, which criminalises <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/triple-talaq-all-you-need-to-know-19324">triple talaq</a> among Muslims, will be presented in the Lok Sabha on Thursday amid several Muslim organisations as well as opposition parties&nbsp;such as Congress, Left and BJD voicing their concerns.&nbsp;

Moreover, the BJP is believed to have issued a three-line whip to its MPs asking them to be present&nbsp;to ensure that the introduction is smooth.&nbsp;

The BJP is understood to have issued the whip so that any stiff opposition from members on the other side at the introduction stage could be blocked.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Opposition parties have voiced reservations over the jail term -- which may extend to three years -- and fine included in the bill</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Opposition parties have voiced reservations over the jail term -- which may extend to three years -- and fine included in the bill" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

The opposition parties have expressed their reservations over the given jail term for violators of the instant divorce, which may extend to three years and a fine for the accused and further envisages entitling Muslim women for maintenance.

It also has a provision for the divorced Muslim women to have the custody of their minor children. The offences under the purview of this bill will be cognisable and non-bailable.

The draft bill says, &quot;any pronouncement of talaq by a person upon his wife, by words, either spoken or written or in electronic form or in any other manner whatsoever, shall be void and illegal&quot;.

The government is sure to press ahead with the bill in Lok Sabha considering its strong majority even though the oppositions parties voice their apprehensions.&nbsp;

The bill will be introduced by law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad. The government is all set for questions and comments and is ready to discuss the justification for proposing the law.&nbsp;

Also read:<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/triple-talaq-destroying-lives-of-muslim-women-says-indian-pm-narendra-modi-7849">&nbsp;Triple talaq destroying lives of Muslim women, says Indian PM Narendra Modi</a>

The opposition parties have said that the jail term may be excessive and some Muslim organisations like <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/aimplb-says-will-request-pm-to-withhold-withdraw-triple-talaq-bill-27594">All India Muslim Personal Law Board</a> (AIMPLB) have held that the Supreme Court ruling striking down triple talaq as unconstitutional is against Sharia law.&nbsp;

&quot;The AIMPLB urges the Central Government to not table the Bill in the Parliament,&quot; said AIMPLB&#39;s Sajjad Nomani after attending an emergency meeting organised by the Board in Lucknow.

The AIMPLB spokesperson further accused the Centre of not following the laid procedure in drafting the bill.

&quot;No procedure was followed in drafting this bill; neither was any stakeholder consulted,&quot; said Nomani.

AIMPLB even claimed that the Bill was against women and children, and if implemented, it would destroy many families.

Earlier in August, in a historic judgement, the Supreme Court had ruled that the practice of divorce through triple talaq among Muslims is &quot;void&quot;, &quot;illegal&quot; and &quot;unconstitutional&quot;.&nbsp;

(With inputs from ANI)

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill 2017 will be introduced by law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill 2017, which criminalises triple talaq among Muslims, will be presented in the Lok Sabha on Thursday amid several Muslim organisations as well as opposition parties such as Congress, Left and BJD voicing their concerns. Moreover, the BJP is believed to have issued a three-line whip to its MPs asking them to be present to ensure that the introduction is smooth. The BJP is understood to have issued the whip so that any stiff opposition from members on the other side at the introduction stage could be blocked. Opposition parties have voiced reservations over the jail term -- which may extend to three years -- and fine included in the bill × The opposition parties have expressed their reservations over the given jail term for violators of the instant divorce, which may extend to three years and a fine for the accused and further envisages entitling Muslim women for maintenance. It also has a provision for the divorced Muslim women to have the custody of their minor children. The offences under the purview of this bill will be cognisable and non-bailable. The draft bill says, "any pronouncement of talaq by a person upon his wife, by words, either spoken or written or in electronic form or in any other manner whatsoever, shall be void and illegal". The government is sure to press ahead with the bill in Lok Sabha considering its strong majority even though the oppositions parties voice their apprehensions. The bill will be introduced by law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad. The government is all set for questions and comments and is ready to discuss the justification for proposing the law. Also read: Triple talaq destroying lives of Muslim women, says Indian PM Narendra Modi The opposition parties have said that the jail term may be excessive and some Muslim organisations like All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) have held that the Supreme Court ruling striking down triple talaq as unconstitutional is against Sharia law. "The AIMPLB urges the Central Government to not table the Bill in the Parliament," said AIMPLB's Sajjad Nomani after attending an emergency meeting organised by the Board in Lucknow. The AIMPLB spokesperson further accused the Centre of not following the laid procedure in drafting the bill. "No procedure was followed in drafting this bill; neither was any stakeholder consulted," said Nomani. AIMPLB even claimed that the Bill was against women and children, and if implemented, it would destroy many families. Earlier in August, in a historic judgement, the Supreme Court had ruled that the practice of divorce through triple talaq among Muslims is "void", "illegal" and "unconstitutional". (With inputs from ANI)

Government to table triple talaq bill in Lok Sabha today, BJP reportedly issues whip to MPs

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) today expressed serious reservations over the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill which was passed by the Lok Sabha and said it will take steps through democratic means to &quot;amend, improve or scrap&quot; it.

The Shia Waqf Board, meanwhile, called for making the punishment to those indulging in &#39;triple talaq&#39; more stringent.

&quot;We will take whatever steps required through democratic means to amend, improve or scrap it. There is no move to go to court as of now...The bill was brought in a haste,&quot; AIMPLB spokesperson Maulana Khalil-ur-Rehman Sajjad Nomani told.

He said the board should have been taken into confidence on the issue.

&quot;Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad while tabling the bill also quoted the board and a lady MP of the ruling party tried to answer the queries raised by the Board in a letter to the prime minister proving that the government recognises the board. So the board should have been taken into confidence,&quot; Nomani said.

However, AIMPLB member Zafaryab Jilani hinted that the board may approach the supreme court against the triple talaq bill once it is passed by the Parliament.

&quot;An option is always open to challenge the law passed (by the Parliament), which is against the Supreme Court&#39;s judgement and the Indian Constitution, in the Supreme Court.

&quot;Convenor of our legal committee has also suggested that it can be challenged in the court. However, we will decide our future course of action once the Bill is passed and the law is enacted,&quot; Jilani told a news channel.

AIMPLB wanted that the triple talaq bill should not be in conflict with either the Constitution, supreme court order or Muslim personal law board, he said.

&quot;We had demanded that Bill should have been prepared only after consultation of representatives of Muslim women organisations, All India Muslim Personal Board, but it doesn&#39;t mean that we were against the Bill.

&quot;We just wanted that Bill should not be in conflict with either Constitution of India, Supreme Court Judgement or Muslim Personal Law Board,&quot; he said.

The president of the All India Muslim Women Personal Law Board (AIMWPLB), Shaista Amber welcomed the tabling of the bill but insisted that it should be in the light of Quran.

&quot;We welcome the tabling of the bill and this has given lots of hope to the women as triple talaq is an evil which has been haunting them,&quot; she said.

Amber, however, added that any law enacted in this regard should be in the light of the Quran and Constitution to make it acceptable to the community.

President of the Shia Waqf Board, Wasim Rizvi, however, said that he had sent a letter to the Prime Minister Narendra Modi for making the punishment to those indulging in the practice more stringent.

&quot;I have urged the Prime Minister through a letter that a jail term of 10 years to those indulging in triple talaq and lodging a criminal case against them,&quot; Rizvi said.

The Shia Waqf Board, meanwhile, called for making the punishment to those indulging in 'triple talaq' more stringent.

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) today expressed serious reservations over the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill which was passed by the Lok Sabha and said it will take steps through democratic means to "amend, improve or scrap" it. The Shia Waqf Board, meanwhile, called for making the punishment to those indulging in 'triple talaq' more stringent. "We will take whatever steps required through democratic means to amend, improve or scrap it. There is no move to go to court as of now...The bill was brought in a haste," AIMPLB spokesperson Maulana Khalil-ur-Rehman Sajjad Nomani told. He said the board should have been taken into confidence on the issue. "Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad while tabling the bill also quoted the board and a lady MP of the ruling party tried to answer the queries raised by the Board in a letter to the prime minister proving that the government recognises the board. So the board should have been taken into confidence," Nomani said. However, AIMPLB member Zafaryab Jilani hinted that the board may approach the supreme court against the triple talaq bill once it is passed by the Parliament. "An option is always open to challenge the law passed (by the Parliament), which is against the Supreme Court's judgement and the Indian Constitution, in the Supreme Court. "Convenor of our legal committee has also suggested that it can be challenged in the court. However, we will decide our future course of action once the Bill is passed and the law is enacted," Jilani told a news channel. AIMPLB wanted that the triple talaq bill should not be in conflict with either the Constitution, supreme court order or Muslim personal law board, he said. "We had demanded that Bill should have been prepared only after consultation of representatives of Muslim women organisations, All India Muslim Personal Board, but it doesn't mean that we were against the Bill. "We just wanted that Bill should not be in conflict with either Constitution of India, Supreme Court Judgement or Muslim Personal Law Board," he said. The president of the All India Muslim Women Personal Law Board (AIMWPLB), Shaista Amber welcomed the tabling of the bill but insisted that it should be in the light of Quran. "We welcome the tabling of the bill and this has given lots of hope to the women as triple talaq is an evil which has been haunting them," she said. Amber, however, added that any law enacted in this regard should be in the light of the Quran and Constitution to make it acceptable to the community. President of the Shia Waqf Board, Wasim Rizvi, however, said that he had sent a letter to the Prime Minister Narendra Modi for making the punishment to those indulging in the practice more stringent. "I have urged the Prime Minister through a letter that a jail term of 10 years to those indulging in triple talaq and lodging a criminal case against them," Rizvi said.

Will take steps through democratic means to "amend, improve or scrap" triple talaq bill: AIMPLB

The president of All India Muslim Personal Law Board, Sajjad Nomani has said that he will request Prime Minister to intervene and withhold and withdraw the Triple Talaq bill.&nbsp;

&quot;No procedure was followed in drafting this bill, neither any stakeholder was consulted,&quot; he said.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
No procedure was followed in drafting this bill, neither any stakeholder was consulted. President of AIMPLB will convey this stand to PM and request him to withhold and withdraw the bill: Sajjad Nomani, AIMPLB <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TripleTalaq?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TripleTalaq</a> <a href="https://t.co/EMa1RgBC6b">pic.twitter.com/EMa1RgBC6b</a>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/944874711531393024?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 24, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

The Cabinet cleared the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/cabinet-clears-triple-talaq-bill-3-years-jail-for-guilty-husbands-in-proposed-law-26824" target="_blank">triple talaq bill</a> last week.

Law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad said that the Cabinet had approved a proposal to introduce the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, to make instant triple talaq void and illegal.

Under the proposed law, instant divorce will be a non-bailable offence with&nbsp;a punishment of three years jail for guilty husbands.

The draft was prepared by an inter-ministerial group headed by Home Minister Rajnath Singh. The other members included External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad and his junior in the ministry PP Chaudhary. 
 
The proposed law would only be applicable to instant triple talaq or &#39;talaq-e-biddat&#39; and it would give power to the victim to approach a magistrate seeking &quot;subsistence allowance&quot; for herself and minor children. 
 
In August, the Supreme Court of India ruled that the practice of triple talaq (instant divorce)&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-to-pronounce-verdict-on-triple-talaq-today-19286">was illegal</a>.&nbsp;

The top court had passed a six-month injunction against the practice, in which time it asked Parliament to legislate on it and bring in a law. &nbsp;

The practice of triple talaq allows Muslim men to divorce their wives instantly by saying &#39;talaq&#39; three consecutive times (either directly, via social media or even a text 
message).

He said 'No procedure was followed in drafting this bill, neither any stakeholder was consulted'

The president of All India Muslim Personal Law Board, Sajjad Nomani has said that he will request Prime Minister to intervene and withhold and withdraw the Triple Talaq bill. "No procedure was followed in drafting this bill, neither any stakeholder was consulted," he said. No procedure was followed in drafting this bill, neither any stakeholder was consulted. President of AIMPLB will convey this stand to PM and request him to withhold and withdraw the bill: Sajjad Nomani, AIMPLB #TripleTalaq pic.twitter.com/EMa1RgBC6b — ANI (@ANI) December 24, 2017 × The Cabinet cleared the triple talaq bill last week. Law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad said that the Cabinet had approved a proposal to introduce the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, to make instant triple talaq void and illegal. Under the proposed law, instant divorce will be a non-bailable offence with a punishment of three years jail for guilty husbands. The draft was prepared by an inter-ministerial group headed by Home Minister Rajnath Singh. The other members included External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad and his junior in the ministry PP Chaudhary. The proposed law would only be applicable to instant triple talaq or 'talaq-e-biddat' and it would give power to the victim to approach a magistrate seeking "subsistence allowance" for herself and minor children. In August, the Supreme Court of India ruled that the practice of triple talaq (instant divorce) was illegal. The top court had passed a six-month injunction against the practice, in which time it asked Parliament to legislate on it and bring in a law. The practice of triple talaq allows Muslim men to divorce their wives instantly by saying 'talaq' three consecutive times (either directly, via social media or even a text message).

Will request PM to withhold and withdraw Triple Talaq bill: AIMPLB President

The All-India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) will meet in Bhopal on September 10 to study the Supreme Court&#39;s triple talaq judgement.

DNA reported AIMPLB secretary and legal adviser Jafrayab Jilani as saying, &quot;During the meeting, the Board will review the Supreme Court verdict and take a decision whether to file a review petition or not.&quot;

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board will meet in Bhopal

The All-India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) will meet in Bhopal on September 10 to study the Supreme Court's triple talaq judgement. DNA reported AIMPLB secretary and legal adviser Jafrayab Jilani as saying, "During the meeting, the Board will review the Supreme Court verdict and take a decision whether to file a review petition or not."

Triple talaq verdict: AIMPLB to meet on Sept 10 to review SC judgement

After the historic Supreme Court verdict banning the practice of triple talaq in the country, Asaduddin Owaisi,&nbsp;leader of the&nbsp;All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul Muslimeen (AIMIM), said there was a need for society to reform and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) would meet in Bhopal early next month to take a view on the top court verdict.&nbsp;

&quot;Judicial pronouncements and law ... experience tells us that what is needed is that society should reform. Reform on the ground should come from society.&quot;

He asked whether the courts will bring in the social reforms which the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) was doing on the ground.

Owaisi had earlier said that his views on triple talaq were the same as the AIMPLB.&nbsp;The AIMPLB has been opposing the practice of triple talaq and has said it does not want the&nbsp;top court to interfere in Muslim Personal Law and ban the Islamic practice of divorce.

Asked to comment on the verdict, the AIMPLB said today that it will chalk out its future course of action in its working committee meeting on September 10 in Bhopal.

The meeting was convened earlier and its agenda was issued yesterday, a member of the Board&#39;s working committee Zafaryab Jilani said.

He also refused to comment on the decision without studying it in detail.

&quot;The working committee meeting in Bhopal on September 10 will take a decision on the future course of action on today&#39;s Supreme Court verdict after studying it in detail,&quot; he said, adding that the hearing on the Babri 
mosque case was also on the agenda of the meeting.

The Indian Union Muslim League, the second largest ally of the Congress-led UDF in Kerala, said the central government should not show undue haste in coming out with an ordinance and discuss the issue.

The All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul Muslimeen leader asked whether the courts will bring in the social reforms which the All India Muslim Personal Law Board was doing on the ground

After the historic Supreme Court verdict banning the practice of triple talaq in the country, Asaduddin Owaisi, leader of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul Muslimeen (AIMIM), said there was a need for society to reform and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) would meet in Bhopal early next month to take a view on the top court verdict. "Judicial pronouncements and law ... experience tells us that what is needed is that society should reform. Reform on the ground should come from society." He asked whether the courts will bring in the social reforms which the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) was doing on the ground. Owaisi had earlier said that his views on triple talaq were the same as the AIMPLB. The AIMPLB has been opposing the practice of triple talaq and has said it does not want the top court to interfere in Muslim Personal Law and ban the Islamic practice of divorce. Asked to comment on the verdict, the AIMPLB said today that it will chalk out its future course of action in its working committee meeting on September 10 in Bhopal. The meeting was convened earlier and its agenda was issued yesterday, a member of the Board's working committee Zafaryab Jilani said. He also refused to comment on the decision without studying it in detail. "The working committee meeting in Bhopal on September 10 will take a decision on the future course of action on today's Supreme Court verdict after studying it in detail," he said, adding that the hearing on the Babri mosque case was also on the agenda of the meeting. The Indian Union Muslim League, the second largest ally of the Congress-led UDF in Kerala, said the central government should not show undue haste in coming out with an ordinance and discuss the issue.

Reform on the ground should come from society: AIMIM's Owaisi on triple talaq

From &quot;social boycott&quot; of Muslims who resort to triple talaq to the appointment of an arbitrator to settle marital disputes are some features of the new guidelines issued by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) for married couples.

The AIMPLB today (May 22)&nbsp;told the Supreme Court that it has issued &quot;guidelines for the husband and wife at the time of dispute&quot; which has to be followed, days after the court reserved its verdict on a clutch of pleas challenging triple talaq.

Giving details of the guidelines framed by it, the AIMPLB told the top&nbsp;court that if there are differences between a husband and his wife, they should first try to mutually resolve the issues by keeping in mind the provisions of the &quot;Shariat&quot;&nbsp;(Islamic law) and try to overlook the mistakes of others.

It said in the second step, if the dispute is not resolved mutually and no desired results are achieved, then there may be a &quot;temporary withdrawal&quot;.

&quot;In case of failure of the first two steps, then senior members of both families should try to reconcile or one arbitrator may be appointed from each side for resolution of the differences,&quot; the fresh AIMPLB guidelines said.

It said &quot;the Muslim community should boycott such persons socially who have pronounced three divorces (talaq) in one go, so that such incidents may be minimised&quot;.

In its affidavit,&nbsp;the AIMPLB stated&nbsp;that only if the dispute still remained unresolved, the husband may pronounce one divorce during the period of purity of his wife and leave his wife till the time her &quot;waiting period&quot;&nbsp;(iddat) ended.

&quot;If a favourable situation arises during the waiting period, the husband should retain her and then both of them should live as spouses. If the husband does not retain his wife during the waiting period, then the marriage will be automatically dissolved after the lapse of waiting period and both of them will be free and authorised to start a new life,&quot; the board said.

It, however, clarified that if the wife is pregnant during the waiting period, then the period will extend till the time of delivery and the husband will have to bear the expenses incurred during waiting period and in case the dower (dowry) has not been paid, then he has to pay it immediately.

&quot;If they reach any amicable settlement after the waiting period, then both of them may restore their relationship by the solemnisation of their marriage afresh with mutual consent along with a new dower,&quot; the guidelines said.

The board has also suggested a second way to annul the marriage in which the husband should pronounce one divorce during the period of the purity of his wife, followed by another divorce in the second month and the third divorce in the third month.

&quot;If they (husband and wife) reach an amicable settlement before the pronouncement of the third divorce, then he has to retain her and restore the previous marriage,&quot; it said, adding that if the wife is not willing to live with her husband then she can terminate the relationship by &quot;Khulaa&quot;&nbsp;(a form of divorce initiated by the wife).&nbsp;

(PTI)

It suggested spouses should first mutually resolve their issues, then temporarily withdraw from the marriage, or involve their family members or an arbitrator if these steps didn't work

From "social boycott" of Muslims who resort to triple talaq to the appointment of an arbitrator to settle marital disputes are some features of the new guidelines issued by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) for married couples. The AIMPLB today (May 22) told the Supreme Court that it has issued "guidelines for the husband and wife at the time of dispute" which has to be followed, days after the court reserved its verdict on a clutch of pleas challenging triple talaq. Giving details of the guidelines framed by it, the AIMPLB told the top court that if there are differences between a husband and his wife, they should first try to mutually resolve the issues by keeping in mind the provisions of the "Shariat" (Islamic law) and try to overlook the mistakes of others. It said in the second step, if the dispute is not resolved mutually and no desired results are achieved, then there may be a "temporary withdrawal". "In case of failure of the first two steps, then senior members of both families should try to reconcile or one arbitrator may be appointed from each side for resolution of the differences," the fresh AIMPLB guidelines said. It said "the Muslim community should boycott such persons socially who have pronounced three divorces (talaq) in one go, so that such incidents may be minimised". In its affidavit, the AIMPLB stated that only if the dispute still remained unresolved, the husband may pronounce one divorce during the period of purity of his wife and leave his wife till the time her "waiting period" (iddat) ended. "If a favourable situation arises during the waiting period, the husband should retain her and then both of them should live as spouses. If the husband does not retain his wife during the waiting period, then the marriage will be automatically dissolved after the lapse of waiting period and both of them will be free and authorised to start a new life," the board said. It, however, clarified that if the wife is pregnant during the waiting period, then the period will extend till the time of delivery and the husband will have to bear the expenses incurred during waiting period and in case the dower (dowry) has not been paid, then he has to pay it immediately. "If they reach any amicable settlement after the waiting period, then both of them may restore their relationship by the solemnisation of their marriage afresh with mutual consent along with a new dower," the guidelines said. The board has also suggested a second way to annul the marriage in which the husband should pronounce one divorce during the period of the purity of his wife, followed by another divorce in the second month and the third divorce in the third month. "If they (husband and wife) reach an amicable settlement before the pronouncement of the third divorce, then he has to retain her and restore the previous marriage," it said, adding that if the wife is not willing to live with her husband then she can terminate the relationship by "Khulaa" (a form of divorce initiated by the wife). (PTI)

'Social boycott' to arbitration: AIMPLB submits triple talaq 'guidelines' to top court

After asserting that Triple Talaq cannot be branded as unconstitutional, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) counsel Kapil Sibal on Tuesday said the Supreme Court 
should not be hearing the matter in the first place.

The argument began when Sibal said that the top court should not decide or interfere in one&#39;s faith and belief. To this Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, one of the five judges 
constituting the bench asked if they should not hear the matter at all.

&quot;Yes, you should not hear,&quot; replied Sibal. Earlier today, Sibal asked the Supreme Court how a 1400-year-old practice be branded &#39;unconstitutional&#39;.&quot;

Triple talaq is going on since 1400 years, how can you say it is unconstitutional?&quot; Sibal asked the apex court.

Sibal further argued that just like the Hindus&#39; faith about Lord Ram&#39;s birth at Ayodhya cannot be questioned, Triple Talaq, which is also a matter of faith for Muslims should not be questioned. Meanwhile, the bench also questioned the AIMPLB on the position of e-divorce given on WhatsApp in Islam.

The federal government yesterday assured the top court that it will come out with a law to regulate marriage and divorce among Muslims if Triple Talaq was upheld as invalid.

&quot;The government will come out with law to regulate marriage and divorce among Muslims if the court holds Triple Talaq as invalid,&quot; Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told the bench.

Rohatgi also conveyed to the apex court bench that Triple Talaq violates Muslim women&#39;s right to equality within the community, and also within the country. Earlier in the hearing, the 
apex court refused to hear all the three cases of Polygamy, Nikah and Halala at once, saying it will focus on one matter at a time.

The Attorney General and top law officers representing the federal government arguing in front of the five-judge Constitution bench said the top court should hear other cases also, 
besides Triple Talaq. However, the top court said that they have limited time, so all the matters could not be covered at present.&nbsp;

On the second day of the hearing last Friday, senior Congress leader Salman Khurshid, who is the amicus curiae in the matter, had told the top court that the controversial Islamic divorce system cannot be justified whatsoever.

Citing examples, Khurshid told the court that the Triple Talaq practice cannot be validated constitutionally.&quot;There was a discussion that whether Triple Talaq is valid constitutionally.

Substantiating my view with reasons and examples, I asserted that it cannot be justified and cannot be given the law&#39;s validation,&quot; Khurshid said during the hearing.The Centre, earlier on 
May 11, told the apex court that it opposes the triple talaq practice and wants to fight for women equality and gender justice.&nbsp;

However, All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) counsel Kapil Sibal told the apex court that triple talaq is a matter that comes under the Muslim board and therefore, in 
his opinion, the top court should not interfere in it.&quot; The Central Government makes rules but in my opinion the apex court should not interfere into it,&quot; Sibal said.

While hearing several pleas filed by Muslim women challenging the practice of triple talaq, the top court observed that it would examine whether the issue is fundamental to religion or 
not. A five-judge bench of the apex court further observed that it would not hear polygamy issue along with the triple talaq case.

Relentless debates on the validity and plausibility of this practice were instigated soon after one petitioner, Shayara Banu, challenged the Muslim personal law over instantaneous 
application of triple talaq (talaq-e-bidat), polygamy and nikah-halala.

Supporting the stance of ending the practice of triple talaq, the Allahabad High Court had earlier asserted that the rights of any person, including Muslim women, cannot be violated in 
the name of &#39;personal law&#39;. In December last year, the Allahabad High Court termed the Islamic practice of divorcing a woman by uttering the word &quot;talaq&quot; thrice &quot;unconstitutional.&quot;

&quot;Triple talaq is unconstitutional. It violates the rights of Muslim women,&quot; ruled the high court, adding that no personal law board was above the Constitution.&nbsp;

(ANI)&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

AIMPLB counsel Kapil Sibal said that the top court should not decide or interfere in one's faith and belief

After asserting that Triple Talaq cannot be branded as unconstitutional, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) counsel Kapil Sibal on Tuesday said the Supreme Court should not be hearing the matter in the first place. The argument began when Sibal said that the top court should not decide or interfere in one's faith and belief. To this Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, one of the five judges constituting the bench asked if they should not hear the matter at all. "Yes, you should not hear," replied Sibal. Earlier today, Sibal asked the Supreme Court how a 1400-year-old practice be branded 'unconstitutional'." Triple talaq is going on since 1400 years, how can you say it is unconstitutional?" Sibal asked the apex court. Sibal further argued that just like the Hindus' faith about Lord Ram's birth at Ayodhya cannot be questioned, Triple Talaq, which is also a matter of faith for Muslims should not be questioned. Meanwhile, the bench also questioned the AIMPLB on the position of e-divorce given on WhatsApp in Islam. The federal government yesterday assured the top court that it will come out with a law to regulate marriage and divorce among Muslims if Triple Talaq was upheld as invalid. "The government will come out with law to regulate marriage and divorce among Muslims if the court holds Triple Talaq as invalid," Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told the bench. Rohatgi also conveyed to the apex court bench that Triple Talaq violates Muslim women's right to equality within the community, and also within the country. Earlier in the hearing, the apex court refused to hear all the three cases of Polygamy, Nikah and Halala at once, saying it will focus on one matter at a time. The Attorney General and top law officers representing the federal government arguing in front of the five-judge Constitution bench said the top court should hear other cases also, besides Triple Talaq. However, the top court said that they have limited time, so all the matters could not be covered at present. On the second day of the hearing last Friday, senior Congress leader Salman Khurshid, who is the amicus curiae in the matter, had told the top court that the controversial Islamic divorce system cannot be justified whatsoever. Citing examples, Khurshid told the court that the Triple Talaq practice cannot be validated constitutionally."There was a discussion that whether Triple Talaq is valid constitutionally. Substantiating my view with reasons and examples, I asserted that it cannot be justified and cannot be given the law's validation," Khurshid said during the hearing.The Centre, earlier on May 11, told the apex court that it opposes the triple talaq practice and wants to fight for women equality and gender justice. However, All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) counsel Kapil Sibal told the apex court that triple talaq is a matter that comes under the Muslim board and therefore, in his opinion, the top court should not interfere in it." The Central Government makes rules but in my opinion the apex court should not interfere into it," Sibal said. While hearing several pleas filed by Muslim women challenging the practice of triple talaq, the top court observed that it would examine whether the issue is fundamental to religion or not. A five-judge bench of the apex court further observed that it would not hear polygamy issue along with the triple talaq case. Relentless debates on the validity and plausibility of this practice were instigated soon after one petitioner, Shayara Banu, challenged the Muslim personal law over instantaneous application of triple talaq (talaq-e-bidat), polygamy and nikah-halala. Supporting the stance of ending the practice of triple talaq, the Allahabad High Court had earlier asserted that the rights of any person, including Muslim women, cannot be violated in the name of 'personal law'. In December last year, the Allahabad High Court termed the Islamic practice of divorcing a woman by uttering the word "talaq" thrice "unconstitutional." "Triple talaq is unconstitutional. It violates the rights of Muslim women," ruled the high court, adding that no personal law board was above the Constitution. (ANI)

Top court should not be hearing triple talaq, argues All India Muslim Personal Law Board

Amid a raging debate on the manner in which &#39;triple talaq&#39; is pronounced by Muslim men in the country, an All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) member today said conveying talaq (divorce) through an SMS or social media was just another mode of communication.

AIMPLB member Hasan Raza said the new age practice of conveying the divorce through SMS or social messaging app Whatsapp is similar to using a postcard or a telegram in the past for the purpose.

&quot;In the past, letters or telegrams were used to convey such messages (of talaq). Now, people send an SMS using mobile phones. So, it is just a way of communicating that message.

&quot;However, we need to look into the credibility of that message.

&quot;Such a message (of talaq) should not be sent in anger,&quot; he said.

He, however, did not state his position on whether pronouncing talaq in such a manner was justified.

Raza, who is also a member of the Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JIH), was replying to a query on whether he found it inappropriate for a Muslim man to dissolve his marriage by sending an SMS or a WhatsApp message to his wife.

He and the JIH&#39;s Gujarat unit president Shakeel Ahmed Rajput were addressing a joint conference here.

Raza said the Gujarat chapter of the JIH has launched a campaign to spread awareness about Sharia laws, particularly those governing triple talaq, in the state.

He told reporters that the issue of triple talaq has been used as &quot;a tool in the vote bank politics&quot;.

&quot;Our contention is that the issue has been unnecessarily politicised. It has become a tool of the vote bank politics.

&quot;We want Muslims to interpret the law properly,&quot; Raza said, adding that &quot;JIH will not let this issue turn into a political game&quot;.

Citing the data, which he said has been acquired through RTI, the AIMPLB member claimed that the number of divorce cases in Muslim community was far less than being projected.

&quot;As per the information we received about the cases of divorce filed in 13 different family courts in some Muslim-dominated areas across the country between 2011 and 2015, only 1,307 such cases were filed by Muslims as against 3,827 cases of Christians and 16,505 cases of Hindus,&quot; he said.

Explaining the drive launched by the JIH for dispelling the &quot;misconceptions&quot; about the Islamic laws, Rajput said, &quot;The initiative named as &#39;Muslim Personal Law Awareness Campaign&#39; is the part of a nationwide awareness drive launched recently by the central body &#39;Jamaat-e-Islami Hind&#39; in an attempt to educate and reform Muslim community&quot;.

He said the campaign, launched across the country yesterday, will continue till May 7.

&quot;This initiative is aimed at educating Muslims about the personal law. Our objective is to make them aware about various rules, instructions and procedures prescribed in our law,&quot; Rajput said.

Earlier this month, the Centre had told the Supreme Court that the practices of &#39;triple talaq&#39;, &#39;nikah halala&#39; and polygamy impact the social status and dignity of Muslim women and deny them fundamental rights guaranteed by Constitution.

The apex court on March 30 observed that the practices of &#39;triple talaq&#39;, &#39;nikah halala&#39; and polygamy among Muslims were important issues involving &quot;sentiments&quot; and a Constitution bench would hear the pleas challenging these from May 11.

Influential Muslim organisations like the AIMPLB have opposed the court&#39;s adjudication of these matters, maintaining that these practices stemmed from the Holy Quran and were not justiciable.

The AIMPLB had recently said it would issue a code of conduct under which those pronouncing &#39;triple talaq&#39; without valid reasons mentioned under &#39;Sharia&#39; (Islamic law) will face social boycott.

(PTI)

Hasan Raza, however, did not state his position on whether pronouncing talaq (divorce) in such a manner was justified

Amid a raging debate on the manner in which 'triple talaq' is pronounced by Muslim men in the country, an All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) member today said conveying talaq (divorce) through an SMS or social media was just another mode of communication. AIMPLB member Hasan Raza said the new age practice of conveying the divorce through SMS or social messaging app Whatsapp is similar to using a postcard or a telegram in the past for the purpose. "In the past, letters or telegrams were used to convey such messages (of talaq). Now, people send an SMS using mobile phones. So, it is just a way of communicating that message. "However, we need to look into the credibility of that message. "Such a message (of talaq) should not be sent in anger," he said. He, however, did not state his position on whether pronouncing talaq in such a manner was justified. Raza, who is also a member of the Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JIH), was replying to a query on whether he found it inappropriate for a Muslim man to dissolve his marriage by sending an SMS or a WhatsApp message to his wife. He and the JIH's Gujarat unit president Shakeel Ahmed Rajput were addressing a joint conference here. Raza said the Gujarat chapter of the JIH has launched a campaign to spread awareness about Sharia laws, particularly those governing triple talaq, in the state. He told reporters that the issue of triple talaq has been used as "a tool in the vote bank politics". "Our contention is that the issue has been unnecessarily politicised. It has become a tool of the vote bank politics. "We want Muslims to interpret the law properly," Raza said, adding that "JIH will not let this issue turn into a political game". Citing the data, which he said has been acquired through RTI, the AIMPLB member claimed that the number of divorce cases in Muslim community was far less than being projected. "As per the information we received about the cases of divorce filed in 13 different family courts in some Muslim-dominated areas across the country between 2011 and 2015, only 1,307 such cases were filed by Muslims as against 3,827 cases of Christians and 16,505 cases of Hindus," he said. Explaining the drive launched by the JIH for dispelling the "misconceptions" about the Islamic laws, Rajput said, "The initiative named as 'Muslim Personal Law Awareness Campaign' is the part of a nationwide awareness drive launched recently by the central body 'Jamaat-e-Islami Hind' in an attempt to educate and reform Muslim community". He said the campaign, launched across the country yesterday, will continue till May 7. "This initiative is aimed at educating Muslims about the personal law. Our objective is to make them aware about various rules, instructions and procedures prescribed in our law," Rajput said. Earlier this month, the Centre had told the Supreme Court that the practices of 'triple talaq', 'nikah halala' and polygamy impact the social status and dignity of Muslim women and deny them fundamental rights guaranteed by Constitution. The apex court on March 30 observed that the practices of 'triple talaq', 'nikah halala' and polygamy among Muslims were important issues involving "sentiments" and a Constitution bench would hear the pleas challenging these from May 11. Influential Muslim organisations like the AIMPLB have opposed the court's adjudication of these matters, maintaining that these practices stemmed from the Holy Quran and were not justiciable. The AIMPLB had recently said it would issue a code of conduct under which those pronouncing 'triple talaq' without valid reasons mentioned under 'Sharia' (Islamic law) will face social boycott. (PTI)

Triple talaq over Whatsapp, SMS just another way of communicating message: AIMPLB member

The body responsible for overseeing Islamic practice&nbsp;in India said those who give triple talaq without valid reasons or wantonly will face social boycott.

Amid intense pressure from rights groups, Muslim women and right-wing political parties, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board has backtracked from its previous stance of standing strong by the Islamic practice of triple talaq.

In Islamic law, a man can simply say talaq (divorce) to his wife to annul the marriage.&nbsp;

&quot;Those who give&nbsp;<a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/triple-talaq" pg="AS1_InlineMedia#AS1_Link#AS1_http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/triple-talaq-without-valid-reasons-not-allowed-says-muslim-personal-law-board/articleshow/58206689.cms">triple talaq</a>&nbsp;without reasons prescribed by the Sharia (reigious law) will face social boycott,&quot; AIMPLB said, reported PTI.

&quot;It has been decided in executive body meeting that those misusing triple talaq will face social boycott,&quot; The Times of India quoted AIMLPB&#39;s Maulana Khalid R Firangi as saying.

The board has also decided ensure the Islamic custom is practiced in the rarest of the rare case.

The constitutional validity of triple talaq is currently under review in India&#39;s Supreme Court.

Last year, a high court in India had said that the Islamic practice violated the equality of women.

Different sets of personal or family laws govern different religions in India. Personal laws for Muslims are partially based on the Sharia law.

The federal government had, earlier this week, told the Supreme Court that the practices of &#39;triple talaq&#39;, &#39;nikah halala&#39; and polygamy had an adverse impact on the social status and dignity of Muslim women and denied them the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Rights activists and several Muslim women have also railed against the Islamic practice of triple talaq.

But several clerics and the AIMPLB have stoutly defended the custom, saying personal laws are outside the realms of the judiciary.

The Board said the validity of Mohammedan Law, founded essentially on the Holy Quran and sources based on it, cannot be tested on the particular provisions of the Indian Constitution.&nbsp;

(WION)

The board has also decided ensure the Islamic custom is practiced in the rarest of the rare case

The body responsible for overseeing Islamic practice in India said those who give triple talaq without valid reasons or wantonly will face social boycott. Amid intense pressure from rights groups, Muslim women and right-wing political parties, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board has backtracked from its previous stance of standing strong by the Islamic practice of triple talaq. In Islamic law, a man can simply say talaq (divorce) to his wife to annul the marriage. "Those who give triple talaq without reasons prescribed by the Sharia (reigious law) will face social boycott," AIMPLB said, reported PTI. "It has been decided in executive body meeting that those misusing triple talaq will face social boycott," The Times of India quoted AIMLPB's Maulana Khalid R Firangi as saying. The board has also decided ensure the Islamic custom is practiced in the rarest of the rare case. The constitutional validity of triple talaq is currently under review in India's Supreme Court. Last year, a high court in India had said that the Islamic practice violated the equality of women. Different sets of personal or family laws govern different religions in India. Personal laws for Muslims are partially based on the Sharia law. The federal government had, earlier this week, told the Supreme Court that the practices of 'triple talaq', 'nikah halala' and polygamy had an adverse impact on the social status and dignity of Muslim women and denied them the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Rights activists and several Muslim women have also railed against the Islamic practice of triple talaq. But several clerics and the AIMPLB have stoutly defended the custom, saying personal laws are outside the realms of the judiciary. The Board said the validity of Mohammedan Law, founded essentially on the Holy Quran and sources based on it, cannot be tested on the particular provisions of the Indian Constitution. (WION)

India's Muslim Law Board to crack down on flimsy or wanton triple talaq

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has told the Supreme Court that the pleas challenging the practices of triple talaq, &#39;nikah halala&#39;, and polygamy among Muslims are not maintainable as the issues fall outside the realm of the judiciary.&nbsp;

The Supreme Court is likely to hear the petitions against the practices on March 30.&nbsp;

The Board said the validity of Mohammedan Law, founded essentially on the Holy Quran and sources based on it, cannot be tested on the particular provisions of the Constitution. It said there was a need for &quot;judicial restraint&quot; before going into constitutional interpretation of these unless such an exercise becomes unavoidable.

It said the issues, raised through a batch of petitions, fell within the legislative domain, and since divorce was an issue of private nature, it cannot be enforced by bringing it under the ambit of fundamental rights.&nbsp;Eight aggrieved Muslim women wanted the court to scrap the practice of triple talaq and polygamy.&nbsp;

The AIMPLB claimed the petitions were &quot;misconceived&quot; and the challenge was based on incorrect understanding of the Muslim Personal law, contending the Constitution grants freedom to every religious section to manage its own affairs in matters of religion.

&quot;At the outset, it is submitted that the present petitions are not maintainable as the petitioners seek to enforce fundamental rights against private parties. It is submitted that the protection guaranteed by Articles 14, 15 and 21 is intended to be available against the Legislature and the Executive and not against private individuals.

&quot;It is submitted that in the present case, the petitioners are seeking judicial orders which are completely outside the purview of Article 32. Private rights cannot be enforced against individual citizens under Article 32(1),&quot; AIMPLB said in its written submissions filed in the apex court.

While opposing the pleas on issues, including alleged gender discrimination faced by Muslim women in divorce cases, the board said the points raised in the petitions are matters of legislative policy and fall outside the sphere of the judiciary.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>While opposing the pleas on issues, including alleged gender discrimination faced by Muslim women in divorce cases, the board said the points raised in the petitions are matters of legislative policy and fall outside the sphere of the judiciary.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=While opposing the pleas on issues, including alleged gender discrimination faced by Muslim women in divorce cases, the board said the points raised in the petitions are matters of legislative policy and fall outside the sphere of the judiciary." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

&quot;The preamble of the Constitution clearly enshrines values of liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship. Further, Article 25 of the Constitution, guarantees freedom of conscience and freedom to profess, practice and propagate religion.

&quot;Article 25 guarantees individual freedom of conscience subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of the third part of the Constitution. Article 26 of the Constitution grants freedom to every religious denomination or any section thereof to manage its own affairs in matters of religion,&quot; it said.

The Board told the court that personal laws do not derive their validity on the ground that they have been passed or made by a legislature or other competent authority and the foundational sources of personal law are their respective scriptural texts.

&quot;The Mohammedan Law is founded essentially on the Holy Quran and sources based on the Holy Quran and thus it cannot fall within the purview of the expression &#39;laws in force&#39;, as mentioned in Article 13 of the Constitution of India, and hence its validity cannot be tested on a challenge based on Part III of the Constitution,&quot; it said.

AIMPLB said that the courts should apply the principle of judicial restraint and not deal with the issue of constitutional interpretation unless such an exercise is unavoidable. &quot;It is humbly submitted that this court ought not to venture into the area of changing personal laws by following the trend in several other countries. It is pertinent to note that any change or reform that comes with the backing of legislature takes due care of diverse cultural background, sensitivity and sensibility of the stakeholder community and thus in spirit adheres to both the principles ie. the principle of democracy and principle of separation of powers.

&quot;It is important to note that changes in other countries, with a distinct socio-cultural and even legal background, must not be applied in Indian context without appreciating the distinct nature of the Indian society as doing so shall not only destroy the democratic legislative process underlined in the Constitution of India but it shall also be great injustice to the followers of Islam in our nation,&quot; the AIMPLB said.

It had earlier said that personal laws of a community cannot be &quot;re-written&quot; in the name of social reforms and contended that the contentious issue relating to Muslim practices of polygamy, triple talaq (talaq-e-bidat) and nikah halala are not matters of &quot;legislative policy&quot; and hence cannot be interfered with.

The apex court had earlier said it would decide issues pertaining to &quot;legal&quot; aspects of the practices of triple talaq, &#39;nikah halala&#39; and polygamy among Muslims and would not deal with the question whether divorce under Muslim law needs to be supervised by courts as it falls under the legislative domain.

The apex court had taken suo motu cognizance of the question whether Muslim women faced gender discrimination in the event of divorce or due to other marriages of their husbands.

(PTI)

The court is likely to hear petitions against the practice, and those of nikah halala and polygamy, on March 30

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has told the Supreme Court that the pleas challenging the practices of triple talaq, 'nikah halala', and polygamy among Muslims are not maintainable as the issues fall outside the realm of the judiciary. The Supreme Court is likely to hear the petitions against the practices on March 30. The Board said the validity of Mohammedan Law, founded essentially on the Holy Quran and sources based on it, cannot be tested on the particular provisions of the Constitution. It said there was a need for "judicial restraint" before going into constitutional interpretation of these unless such an exercise becomes unavoidable. It said the issues, raised through a batch of petitions, fell within the legislative domain, and since divorce was an issue of private nature, it cannot be enforced by bringing it under the ambit of fundamental rights. Eight aggrieved Muslim women wanted the court to scrap the practice of triple talaq and polygamy. The AIMPLB claimed the petitions were "misconceived" and the challenge was based on incorrect understanding of the Muslim Personal law, contending the Constitution grants freedom to every religious section to manage its own affairs in matters of religion. "At the outset, it is submitted that the present petitions are not maintainable as the petitioners seek to enforce fundamental rights against private parties. It is submitted that the protection guaranteed by Articles 14, 15 and 21 is intended to be available against the Legislature and the Executive and not against private individuals. "It is submitted that in the present case, the petitioners are seeking judicial orders which are completely outside the purview of Article 32. Private rights cannot be enforced against individual citizens under Article 32(1)," AIMPLB said in its written submissions filed in the apex court. While opposing the pleas on issues, including alleged gender discrimination faced by Muslim women in divorce cases, the board said the points raised in the petitions are matters of legislative policy and fall outside the sphere of the judiciary. While opposing the pleas on issues, including alleged gender discrimination faced by Muslim women in divorce cases, the board said the points raised in the petitions are matters of legislative policy and fall outside the sphere of the judiciary. × "The preamble of the Constitution clearly enshrines values of liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship. Further, Article 25 of the Constitution, guarantees freedom of conscience and freedom to profess, practice and propagate religion. "Article 25 guarantees individual freedom of conscience subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of the third part of the Constitution. Article 26 of the Constitution grants freedom to every religious denomination or any section thereof to manage its own affairs in matters of religion," it said. The Board told the court that personal laws do not derive their validity on the ground that they have been passed or made by a legislature or other competent authority and the foundational sources of personal law are their respective scriptural texts. "The Mohammedan Law is founded essentially on the Holy Quran and sources based on the Holy Quran and thus it cannot fall within the purview of the expression 'laws in force', as mentioned in Article 13 of the Constitution of India, and hence its validity cannot be tested on a challenge based on Part III of the Constitution," it said. AIMPLB said that the courts should apply the principle of judicial restraint and not deal with the issue of constitutional interpretation unless such an exercise is unavoidable. "It is humbly submitted that this court ought not to venture into the area of changing personal laws by following the trend in several other countries. It is pertinent to note that any change or reform that comes with the backing of legislature takes due care of diverse cultural background, sensitivity and sensibility of the stakeholder community and thus in spirit adheres to both the principles ie. the principle of democracy and principle of separation of powers. "It is important to note that changes in other countries, with a distinct socio-cultural and even legal background, must not be applied in Indian context without appreciating the distinct nature of the Indian society as doing so shall not only destroy the democratic legislative process underlined in the Constitution of India but it shall also be great injustice to the followers of Islam in our nation," the AIMPLB said. It had earlier said that personal laws of a community cannot be "re-written" in the name of social reforms and contended that the contentious issue relating to Muslim practices of polygamy, triple talaq (talaq-e-bidat) and nikah halala are not matters of "legislative policy" and hence cannot be interfered with. The apex court had earlier said it would decide issues pertaining to "legal" aspects of the practices of triple talaq, 'nikah halala' and polygamy among Muslims and would not deal with the question whether divorce under Muslim law needs to be supervised by courts as it falls under the legislative domain. The apex court had taken suo motu cognizance of the question whether Muslim women faced gender discrimination in the event of divorce or due to other marriages of their husbands. (PTI)

Triple talaq outside realm of judiciary: Muslim Personal Law Board to Supreme Court

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on Saturday decided to oppose tooth and nail the Centre&rsquo;s move against the triple talaq and the imposition of Unform Civil Code in the country.

The decision was taken on the second day of the three-day closed door convention of AIMPLB, to discuss issues ranging from triple talaq, Uniform Civil Code (UCC) to other religious matters of the Muslims.

&ldquo;It has been unanimously decided in the convention that we want triple talaq to stay and we will oppose any move by the government against it. We will also oppose uniform civil code.

The triple talaq has been going on for ages and it is part of our religious rights,&rdquo; TMC MP and chairman of AIMPLB reception committee Sultan Ahmed told PTI.

The AIMPLB has already launched a signature campaign opposing the move and more than 10 crore Muslim women from across the country have signed supporting the practice of triple talaq.

The issue of alleged harassment of Muslim youth was also taken up during the convention.

&ldquo;Our President Maulana Rabey Hasani Nadvi, during his speech, has clearly said that the BJP government at the Centre has taken up an agenda of unnecessarily harassing the Muslims of the country especially the young generation. The government has the tendency to implicate the Muslims as anti-nationals and harass them,&rdquo; a member of the AIMPLB told PTI on condition of anonymity.

He said the BJP is trying to infringe upon the religious rights of Muslims and it will not be tolerated.

&ldquo;Muslims are part of this great secular, democratic republic India. We will fight against this communal designs of the BJP government&rdquo;. 
 
(PTI)

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board accused the ruling BJP of trying to infringe upon the religious rights of Muslims

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on Saturday decided to oppose tooth and nail the Centre’s move against the triple talaq and the imposition of Unform Civil Code in the country. The decision was taken on the second day of the three-day closed door convention of AIMPLB, to discuss issues ranging from triple talaq, Uniform Civil Code (UCC) to other religious matters of the Muslims. “It has been unanimously decided in the convention that we want triple talaq to stay and we will oppose any move by the government against it. We will also oppose uniform civil code. The triple talaq has been going on for ages and it is part of our religious rights,” TMC MP and chairman of AIMPLB reception committee Sultan Ahmed told PTI. The AIMPLB has already launched a signature campaign opposing the move and more than 10 crore Muslim women from across the country have signed supporting the practice of triple talaq. The issue of alleged harassment of Muslim youth was also taken up during the convention. “Our President Maulana Rabey Hasani Nadvi, during his speech, has clearly said that the BJP government at the Centre has taken up an agenda of unnecessarily harassing the Muslims of the country especially the young generation. The government has the tendency to implicate the Muslims as anti-nationals and harass them,” a member of the AIMPLB told PTI on condition of anonymity. He said the BJP is trying to infringe upon the religious rights of Muslims and it will not be tolerated. “Muslims are part of this great secular, democratic republic India. We will fight against this communal designs of the BJP government”. (PTI)

Will oppose government on triple talaq, Uniform Civil Code: India's muslim body decides at meet

aimplb

Aimplb, News on Aimplb, stories on Aimplb, articles on Aimplb, Aimplb stories at Wion, Aimplb news, Aimplb latest news