Which of the following led to the setting aside of the practice of Triple Talaq as evident in the case of Shayara Bano v. UOI (2017) SCC 1?

Correct option is B

The Correct Answer is b

Explanation

The Supreme Court, by a 3:2 majority, declared the practice of instant Triple Talaq as unconstitutional. The legal rationale behind setting it aside involved a two-pronged approach by the majority judges:

1. Status as "Law in Force": Justices Rohinton Nariman and U.U. Lalit held that the Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 is a pre-constitutional legislation that recognized and enforced Triple Talaq. As a "law in force" under Article 13(1) of the Constitution, it could be tested against fundamental rights.

2. Violation of Article 14 (Manifest Arbitrariness): The court found that the practice allowed a marital tie to be broken "capriciously and whimsically" by a husband without any attempt at reconciliation. This "manifest arbitrariness" was held to be a direct violation of the Right to Equality under Article 14.

Justice Kurian Joseph, in his concurring opinion, further noted that "what is held to be bad in the Holy Quran cannot be good in Shariat," arguing that the practice lacked legal sanction because it was against the tenets of the Quran.