Constitutionality of Talaq-e-Hasan
Benazeer Heena v Union of India
The Supreme Court will decide whether Talaq-e-Hasan under Muslim personal law violates Articles 14, 15, 21 and 25 of the Constitution.
Pending
Parties
Petitioner: Benazeer Heena, Hasin Jahan, Ayesha Syed, Malka Bibi, Safiya Hussain, Syeda Ambreen, Benazeer Nishan Patel and Nazreen Shaikh
Lawyers: AOR Pulkit Agarwal
Respondent: Union of India, National Commission for Women, National Human Rights Commission, National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, All India Muslim Personal Law Board
Lawyers: Additional Solicitor General K.M. Nataraj
Case Details
Case Number: WP(C) 348/2022
Next Hearing: January 21, 2025
Last Updated: December 16, 2025
Key Issues
Does Talaq-e-Hasan violate Articles 14, 15, 21 and 25 of the Constitution?
Can Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, and the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, be declared unconstitutional for violation of fundamental rights under Part III of the Constitution?
Can uniform guidelines be framed by the Union for Gender Neutral Religion Neutral Uniform Grounds of Divorce and Uniform Procedure of Divorce for all?
Case Description
On 2 May 2022, Benazeer Heena, a Ghaziabad-based journalist and the mother of a then 8-month-old, filed a writ petition challenging the constitutionality of Talaq-e-Hasan and all forms of extra-judicial talaq. She challenged Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 and the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, as violative of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 25 of the Constitution of India.
In December 2021, Benazeer Heena was forced to leave home due to an allegedly abusive marriage. In February 2022, she lodged a complaint with the Delhi Commission for Women (DCW). Subsequently, Heena’s husband issued three talaq notices, resulting in a unilateral divorce.
On 19 April that year, Heena was served the first notice of talaq by her husband, following which she lodged an FIR with the police against her husband. However, the police remarked that Talaq-e-Hasan is permitted under Sharia Law.
On 2 May, Heena filed the writ petition before the Supreme Court under Article 32 to challenge the constitutionality of the divorce and related provisions of law. The second and third notices of talaq were sent to her on 19 May and 20 June, respectively.
Talaq-e-Hasan is an extra-judicial form of divorce under the Sharia Law that permits a man to divorce his wife by pronouncing the word “talaq” once a month for three consecutive months. Women are not permitted to divorce by way of Talaq-e-Hasan.
Heena has also challenged Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, which is a non-obstante clause, giving the Act an overriding effect on other conflicting laws in the subject of marriage. As a result, notwithstanding any prevalent law, the subject of marriage shall solely be governed by Muslim personal law. Similarly, the petitioner challenged the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, contending that it violates fundamental rights granted under Part III of the Constitution.
Heena’s petition was tagged with other petitions of a similar nature. The petitioners argued that the disputed forms of extra-judicial divorce led to polygamy, which is injurious to public morality. They argued that Talaq-e-Hasan is harmful to the dignity and decency of Muslim women. In addition to challenging the impugned Acts, the petitioners prayed for the Court to direct the Centre to frame guidelines for gender-neutral grounds of divorce and a uniform procedure for divorce.