National #TripleTalaq Debate: AIMPLB Tells SC Not To Meddle With “Allah’s Directions” By Maurice FabNewz Posted on March 28, 2017 The All India Muslim Personal Law Board today took a hardline stand against the Supreme Court in what it said amounted to religious sacrilege and disobeying “Allah’s wishes”. The AIMPLB today declared that if the apex court ruled against triple talaq, it would be akin to rewriting the Quran and would also force Muslims into committing sin. The AIMPLB stated that contrary to popular perception, Islam was among the first religions to give women equality and dignity. The AIMPLB, in its written submission before the SC, also said that personal law provisions were protected by section 25, which guarantees the rights to practice and profess any religion of one’s choice. The submission also stated,” If such casual denunciation of the verses of the holy book is permitted, then soon Islam would cease to exist. Though triple talaq in one sitting is an unusual mode of divorce in Islam, it cannot be declared to be invalid in the light of the direct verses of Holy Quran and categorical command of the Messenger of Allah.” The AIMPLB had also sought the protection of sections 26 and 29 to hide its misogynistic and anachronistic practices, as described by women’s rights groups. The apex court is hearing the triple talaq debate. The next hearing is likely on March 30 Eight Muslim women who claimed to have been aggrieved by the triple talaq practice had approached the apex court with one publicly stated objective: the triple talaq must go. In light of this, the centre had filed a petition with the SC. The centre said that it supported the scrapping of the practice. A ban was then proposed, with the Modi government stating that the rights and dignity of a woman were not negotiable. The government brought to the court’s notice the fact that even theocratic states have had a change in such personal laws in the past. Only Sunni Muslims have been said to have these issues. In a separate statement, the AIMPLB tried to defend its stand. It said,”If a serious discord develops between a couple, and the husband does not want to live with the wife, legal compulsions of time-consuming separation proceedings and expenses may deter him from taking the legal course. In such instances, he may resort to illegal, criminal ways of murdering or burning her alive.” The SC will hear the case next on March 30.