Supreme Court Questions Talaq-e-Hasan: How It Differs from Triple Talaq and Why It’s Under Scrutiny
Judges say lawyer-issued divorce notices leave women vulnerable and lack constitutional validity
Talaq-e-Hasan seen as ‘triple talaq in slow motion’; court revisits Muslim divorce practices eight years after instant triple talaq ban
By Our Legal Reporter
New Delhi: November 21, 2025:
The Supreme Court of India has placed the Islamic divorce practice known as Talaq-e-Hasan under close judicial scrutiny, raising questions about its constitutional validity and its impact on women. The move comes nearly eight years after the apex court struck down instant triple talaq (Talaq-e-Biddat) as unconstitutional.
What is Talaq-e-Hasan?
Talaq-e-Hasan is a form of divorce in Islamic law where a husband pronounces the word “talaq” once a month for three consecutive months. If reconciliation does not occur during this period, the marriage is dissolved. Unlike instant triple talaq, which was banned in 2017, Talaq-e-Hasan is staggered over time and allows scope for reconciliation.
However, critics argue that it still gives unilateral power to the husband, leaving women vulnerable. The practice has been described by some as “triple talaq in slow motion.”
Supreme Court’s Concerns
During hearings in November 2025, a bench led by Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan, and NK Singh questioned the validity of Talaq-e-Hasan, especially the growing practice of husbands authorizing lawyers to issue monthly divorce notices on their behalf.
The court observed that:
- Divorce requires the husband’s direct pronouncement and signature, not delegation to third parties.
- Allowing lawyers to send notices exposes women to serious legal vulnerabilities, including accusations of polyandry if they remarry without proper documentation.
- Such practices are inconsistent with the principles of modern society and constitutional dignity.
Justice Surya Kant bluntly asked: “How is this allowed in modern society?”.
Case That Triggered Scrutiny
The issue came to the court’s attention through the petition of journalist Benazeer Heena, who challenged the unilateral use of Talaq-e-Hasan. Her husband had authorized a lawyer to issue talaq notices, which she argued were invalid since they lacked his signature.
The court praised her courage and summoned the husband, highlighting the broader condition of women subjected to such practices.
Difference Between Talaq-e-Hasan and Triple Talaq
- Triple Talaq (Talaq-e-Biddat): Outlawed in 2017, it allowed instant divorce by pronouncing “talaq” three times in one sitting. The Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional, calling it “bad in law.”
- Talaq-e-Hasan: Spread over three months, with one pronouncement each month. It allows time for reconciliation but remains unilateral, initiated only by the husband.
While supporters argue that Talaq-e-Hasan is more reasonable than instant triple talaq, critics say it still violates women’s rights by denying them equal say in marital dissolution.
Constitutional Debate
The court’s scrutiny centers on whether Talaq-e-Hasan violates Articles 14 (equality before law), 15 (non-discrimination), and 21 (right to life and dignity) of the Constitution.
Legal experts note that while the practice is rooted in personal law, constitutional principles must prevail when fundamental rights are at stake. The court may consider referring the matter to a five-judge constitutional bench for deeper examination.
Reactions from the Community
The debate has sparked mixed reactions:
- Women’s rights activists have welcomed the court’s intervention, calling Talaq-e-Hasan discriminatory and outdated.
- Conservative voices argue that the practice is part of Islamic personal law and should not be interfered with.
- Legal scholars emphasize the need for reforms that balance religious freedom with constitutional rights.
Historical Context
The Supreme Court’s 2017 judgment in Shayara Bano v. Union of India outlawed instant triple talaq, marking a landmark moment in women’s rights. The current scrutiny of Talaq-e-Hasan is seen as a continuation of that reform process.
By questioning Talaq-e-Hasan, the court is signalling that all forms of unilateral divorce practices may need to be revisited to ensure gender justice.
Possible Outcomes
The court’s decision could lead to:
- Complete abolition of Talaq-e-Hasan if found unconstitutional.
- Reform or regulation, requiring mutual consent or judicial oversight.
- Status quo, if the court upholds the practice as valid under personal law.
Whatever the outcome, the case is expected to have far-reaching implications for Muslim personal law and women’s rights in India.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s scrutiny of Talaq-e-Hasan marks a critical moment in India’s ongoing debate over personal law and constitutional rights. While the practice differs from instant triple talaq by allowing time for reconciliation, it remains unilateral and leaves women vulnerable.
By questioning lawyer-issued notices and emphasizing constitutional dignity, the court has signalled its intent to protect women from discriminatory practices. The final verdict will determine whether Talaq-e-Hasan survives as a valid form of divorce or joins instant triple talaq in being declared unconstitutional.
🔑 Keywords for SEO & Faster Searches
- Talaq-e-Hasan Supreme Court case
- Difference between Talaq-e-Hasan and triple talaq
- Supreme Court scrutiny Muslim divorce law
- Lawyer-issued talaq notices invalid
- Benazeer Heena petition Talaq-e-Hasan
- Triple talaq ban 2017 Shayara Bano case
- Muslim personal law divorce India
- Constitutional validity of Talaq-e-Hasan
- Women’s rights and Islamic divorce practices
- Supreme Court gender justice rulings