A man from Afghanistan and an Argentian lady ended their cross border love in Kalaburagi, five months after they got hitched.

Ahmad Zarif Chisty, 30, a Sufi preacher and Daniela Soledad, 33 of Argentina met on Facebook. After love bloomed between them, they decided to get married in India. Daniela allegedly too took after Sufism. In like manner, they reached New Delhi on November 22, 2017, and they got married the next day. Subsequent to making a trip to Ajmer in Rajasthan and Vijayapura in Karnataka, the coupled settled in Kalaburagi.

According to the police Chisty, who was preaching Sufism and teaching Quran in the city, had leased a small house in Makkah Colony on Hagarga Road, where the couple settled. Differences arose between the two when another senior Sufi preachers started visiting their home and Chisty requested that Daniela serve them by pressing their hands and legs however he himself declined from doing so saying that he too was a Sufi preacher. Daniela was disturbed as well as declined to do so as it was against her way of life.

The differences aggravated over some stretch of time and Daniela contacted her parents back in Argentina looking for their assistance to return. Her parents at that point reached the Argentina consulate in Mumbai and looked for their assistance. The office informed the Kalaburagi police. The police effectively traced the couple as well as inquired about alleged torture and harassment meted out to Daniela.

Police sources said that Daniela was vexed and felt insulted by Chisty’s conduct. She additionally felt lost of privacy in the little house and needed to return to Argentina. She denied any physical or sexual harassment and didn’t wish to lodge any complaint.

The consulate general from Argentina department in Mumbai landed in Kalaburagi alongside another female associate on April 10 and took Daniela with them. Daniela is presently said to be in Argentina. Chisty was let off as no case was filed against him.

Seven months after declaring instant triple talaq unconstitutional, the Supreme Court (SC) today agreed to examine the constitutional validity of polygamy and ‘nikah halala’ in the Muslim community.

The SC noted that the five-judge bench which examined instant triple talaq – and pronounced their order in August last year – had kept open the issues of polygamy and ‘nikah halala’.
The SC today issued notices to the Centre and the Law Commission asking them to make their stand clear on a batch of petitions asking the two practices be abolished. Polygamy is the practice of being married to more than one woman. Nikah-halala is a practice intended to curb divorce. Under it, a man cannot remarry his former wife without her having her go through the process of marrying someone else, consummating that marriage, getting divorced and observing a separation period called Iddat.
One petitioner, a Hyderabad-based lawyer, has contended that while Muslim law allows a man to have multiple wives by way of the temporary marriages or polygamy, the same permission is not extended to women and therefore the law violates the fundamental rights of Muslim women.
Another petition, filed by a Delhi-based woman, has said that by virtue of the Muslim Personal Law, section 494 of IPC (marrying again during lifetime of husband or wife) was rendered inapplicable to Muslims and no married woman from the community has the avenue to file a complaint against her husband for the offence of bigamy.
In a historic decision last August, a five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court by 3:2 majority struck down triple talaq, or instant divorce, as unconstitutional. While then Chief Justice J S Khehar and justice S Abdul Nazeer held triple talaq to be part of fundamental right to religion of Muslims and said it was not unconstitutional, Justices Kurian Joseph, R F Nariman and U U Lalit said triple talaq violated the fundamental right of Muslim women as they are subjected to arbitrary irrevocable divorce through this practice.

The government is ready to discuss the triple talaq bill in the Rajya Sabha and was open to suggestions from the opposition — but referring it to a Select Committee made no sense, Union Minority Affairs Minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi has said.

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill — commonly called the triple talaq bill as it criminalises “instant” divorce among Muslims — is scheduled to be taken up in the Rajya Sabha in the coming week as part of the government’s business.

“Let’s discuss the bill in the House and the members can move amendments. Nobody can stop a member from moving any amendment,” Naqvi added

“But where is the sense in insisting on refering the bill to a select committee of the House? What will the Select Committee do? Even the House can scrutinise legislation,” he added.

The Select Committee may also invite suggestions from stakeholders such as various Muslim organisations and women’s bodies, which the government has apparently not done.

The opposition, Muslim bodies and women’s rights groups have accused the government of “unilaterally” drafting the legislation without seeking any opinion from the stakeholders or those who would be directly affected by the proposed law.

However, Naqvi said: “We have said it earlier too and reiterate that the government is open to suggestions on the bill from the opposition and others.”

But on the question of negotiating the penal provision — which is the main bone of contention — the minister said the bill would make no sense without this as the practice of triple talaq continues even after the Supreme Court banned it.

Under Section 4 of the bill, “Whoever pronounces talaq upon his wife by words, either spoken or written or in electronic form or in any other manner whatsoever, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and fine.”

It also provides for a subsistence allowance for a divorced woman and her children as determined by a magistrate and provides custody of the minor children to the woman in case of divorce.

The government had introduced the triple talaq bill in the Rajya Sabha on January 3 this year during the winter session of Parliament. The Lok Sabha had earlier passed the bill.

Almost all the opposition parties have objected to the penal provision in the bill and had insisted it be sent to a Select Committee of the Rajya Sabha for closer scrutiny. Congress leader Anand Sharma and Trinamool Congress member Sukhendu Shekhar Roy had moved amendments to this effect.

Sharma even suggested the names of the 17 members of the select panel from the opposition’s side, leaving it to the government to give its names.

The government, however, vociferously objected to the proposal, citing various technical reasons. The opposition even demanded voting on the issue on the day the bill was introduced as well as the next day, January 4.

However, on the first day, the treasury benches members created a ruckus, forcing the chair to adjourn the House for the day, saying voting could not be done unless the House was in order.

The next day, the government listed the bill at the bottom of the day’s business, prompting loud protests from the opposition, which wanted it to be taken up early and a vote taken. The chair said he could not help as it was the government’s prerogative at which position to list a bill. Amid pandemonium, the House was adjourned for the day.

The winter session concluded the next day on January 5, and the triple talaq bill is still pending in the upper House.

On March 16, Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs Vijay Goel, while announcing the coming week’s business, also listed the triple talaq bill for considering and passing.

(IANS)