Read Time: 09 minutes

Dealing with a case where a Muslim man gave his wife triple talaq over WhatsApp prior to the ruling of the Supreme court declaring it unconstitutional, the Chhattisgarh High Court said that the Apex court’s ruling meant that Triple Talaq was not in existence from the very beginning.

Therefore, the high court refused to accept the claim that the wife couldn’t file a case under Section 498-A of I.P.C (Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) following such divorce.

The bench of Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas was hearing a criminal writ petition seeking quashing of FIR against the petitioner/husband for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 406 and 34 of IPC and its consequential criminal proceedings initiated against him and his family members.

During the hearing, the court had two main questions to deal with. First, whether the divorce given by the petitioner was in accordance with Shariat Law and if it has not been given as per Shariat Law, then what was its effect, and second, whether judgment passed by the Supreme Court in case of Shayara Bano vs. Union of India and other connected matters, reported in 2017 (9) SCC 1 has retrospective effect or not.

A submission was made before the court that as per Shariat Law the husband has to give “Meher” amount to the wife at the time of giving divorce which was not yet given to her, therefore, Talaq given through social media in Watsapp is not proper and is not legally valid Talaq as per Muslim Law. Accordingly, taking note of this submission and facts of the case, the court dealt with the second controversy mainly.

Citing multiple judgments passed by various other high courts, the bench stated that the Supreme Court in Shayara Bano has held that judgment has retrospective effect.

Court noted that "since the Triple Talaq had been declared illegal by the Constitutional Bench of the Apex on August 22, 2017, it meant the Triple Talaq was not in existence from the very beginning because the judgment of the highest Court is prospective obligation over the subject."

Therefore, resolving the controversy, court held, “that since the constitutional Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the triple Talaq is invalid and illegal, therefore, contention of the petitioner that after divorce/triple Talaq, his wife cannot file a complaint under Section 498-A of I.P.C., is not acceptable.”

Matter in brief

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner Mohammad Akhtar Mansoori married Zarri Naaz Ansari in 2016 as per Muslim Rites and rituals. Thereafter, the petitioners started treating his wife with cruelty and harassment in connection with demand of dowry.

It was alleged that after marriage, wife of the petitioner was tortured not only by him but also by his family members for dowry. The FIR in the matter read that the wife was forcefully sent to her parental in 2017, upon reaching where, she received the talaq message from her husband, the very next day.

As per the FIR, on July 3, 2017, the petitioner pronounced Talaq (thrice) against his wife over a WhatsApp message.

Thereafter, being aggrieved by the same, the wife got a case registered in September 2017 stating that her husband’s such behavior had caused mental torture to her.

Opposing the allegations, it was contended by the petitioner that since the petitioner has already given divorce to his wife before the filing of the FIR, therefore, registration of FIR was nothing but an abuse of process of law and subsequent criminal case so far as commission of alleged offence under Section 498-A of IPC was not justifiable and deserves to be quashed.

Supreme Court's ruling on Triple Talaq

The issue of Triple Talaq came up before the Supreme Court in Shayara Bano vs. Union of India and other connected matters, reported in 2017 (9) SCC 1 and the Constitutional bench of the Court finally concluded the issue after examining the circular issued by All India Muslim Personal Law Board and other relevant provisions of Shariat Law and held that Triple Talaq is nonest and void, therefore, directed the Central Government to make a law on this subject. The judgment came on August 22, 2017. 

Case Title: Mohd. Akhtar Mansoori v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.