Supreme Court Directs Mediation in Talaq-e-Hasan Case, Appoints Retired Judge as Mediator
The Supreme Court of India has taken a significant step in addressing a contentious issue by referring a plea challenging the practice of talaq-e-hasan to mediation. In a hearing on Wednesday, the bench, comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, directed the petitioner, Benazeer Heena, and her husband to attempt mediation to resolve their dispute. To facilitate this process, the court appointed retired Supreme Court judge Justice Kurian Joseph as the mediator, emphasizing the sensitive and emotionally charged nature of the matter.
PIL Challenges Constitutional Validity of Talaq-e-Hasan
The bench was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Benazeer Heena, a journalist, who has challenged the constitutional validity of the talaq-e-hasan custom. In her petition, Heena contended that this practice is irrational, arbitrary, and violates Articles 14, 15, 21, and 25 of the Indian Constitution. She specifically argued that her husband had sent her a talaq-e-hasan notice through his lawyer, which she claims is not a valid method of service under personal laws.
During the proceedings, Advocate Rizwan Ahmed, representing Heena, informed the court that he had filed a contempt petition against the husband. This was due to the husband's alleged attempts to pronounce talaq in a manner not contemplated under the law, including sending notices by post to an incorrect address and then claiming his quota of talaq was exhausted. The Supreme Court had previously issued a notice on Heena's plea on November 19, 2025, questioning the practice, and has now opted for mediation as a means to settle the dispute amicably.
Court Refuses Interim Stay, Cites Sensitivity of the Issue
In a related development, the Supreme Court declined to grant an interim stay on the practice of Muslim husbands allegedly pronouncing talaq illegally through digital means such as WhatsApp and email. Chief Justice Surya Kant, presiding over the bench, advised petitioners to await the court's final decision, highlighting the sensitive nature of the issue. He stated, "Suppose we do it, people will unnecessarily pre-judge us. These are slightly sensitive matters…where human emotions are involved. Maybe ultimately, we agree with you. In that case we will not hesitate, we will not shy away from any directions that may be issued. But that we will issue after hearing both sides."
This cautious approach underscores the court's recognition of the complex interplay between legal principles and personal emotions in cases involving marital disputes and religious customs. The bench's decision to prioritize mediation over immediate judicial intervention reflects a broader trend towards alternative dispute resolution in family matters.
Other Petitions and Court's Interim Orders
During the pendency of Benazeer Heena's petition, several other similar cases have been filed before the Supreme Court. In one such instance, the court heard a plea from an illiterate homemaker who alleged she was a victim of "unilateral extra-judicial talaq-e-hasan." She claimed that her husband had taken her signatures on blank paper, and despite the court issuing a notice to the husband, he failed to appear.
In response, the bench ordered a stay on the operation of the divorce, stating, "As he (husband) has not come forward to deny the allegations, we stay operation of the alleged talaq-e-hasan resorted to by him for divorcing the petitioner. Having stayed that, we direct that parties shall be deemed to be a validly married couple unless husband comes forward and shows that valid talaq has been given." Additionally, the court directed the concerned Station House Officer to locate the husband and ensure his presence before the court, highlighting the judiciary's proactive stance in protecting the rights of vulnerable individuals.
Implications and Future Proceedings
The Supreme Court's actions in these cases signal a nuanced approach to handling disputes involving Muslim personal law. By referring the talaq-e-hasan plea to mediation, the court aims to foster a resolution that respects both legal norms and personal sensitivities. The appointment of a retired judge as mediator adds a layer of expertise and impartiality to the process, potentially setting a precedent for similar future cases.
As the mediation proceeds, all eyes will be on the outcomes, which could influence broader discussions on the reform of personal laws in India. The court's refusal to grant an interim stay, coupled with its emphasis on hearing both sides, suggests a deliberate and measured judicial strategy aimed at balancing constitutional rights with cultural practices. This development marks a critical juncture in the ongoing legal discourse surrounding gender justice and religious customs in the country.
