New Delhi, Dec 27 (PTI) The passage of the triple talaq bill drew mixed reactions from Muslim bodies Thursday, with some terming it “very dangerous”, while others welcoming it.
S Q R Ilayas, member of working committee of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), said there was no need for this bill and it has been brought keeping in mind the upcoming Lok Sabha elections.
“It is a very dangerous bill that will make a civil issue a criminal offence. Who will take care of the wives and children once the husband goes to jail?” he said.
He also said that instead of gender justice, the bill would prove to be a “punishment” for men and women from the community.
“Four crore women signed a petition saying they do not want the bill then who are these Muslim women who want it?” he questioned the government.
AIMPLB executive member Asma Zehra said the move to pass the triple talaq bill was “unconstitutional” and is an infringement of the constitutional rights of Muslim women.
“The Law minister (Ravi Shankar Prasad in the debate) was not able to answer questions posed by the opposition. They are giving examples of domestic violence act but that is applicable for all religions. Why just target Muslims,” she said.
She further said the move will “damage families” and claimed that it is the aim of the government.
Maulana Mahmood Daryabadi, General Secretary of the All India Ulema Council, said when the Supreme Court has declared triple talaq unconstitutional, why is it even being discussed here.
“The government should be focussing on fund for Muslim women and children who will be left without any source of income once their husband goes to jail,” he said.
Zakia Soman, member of the Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, welcomed the bill and further demanded the Muslim Marriage Act on lines of the Hindu Marriage Act that would deal with other issues like polygamy and child guardianship.
The Lok Sabha Thursday passed the bill which criminalises the practice of instant triple talaq, with the government rejecting the contention that it was aimed at targeting a particular community.
The opposition, which had been demanding that the bill be referred to a ‘joint select committee’, staged a walkout when its demand was rejected by the government.
Just before the bill was to be passed by a voice vote, the opposition sought a division and the bill was passed by 245 votes in favour and 11 against it.
Several amendments moved by opposition were negated by a division that was insisted by opposition members.
