The practice of “triple talaq” undermines the institution of marriage and severely impacts Muslim women, the government told the Supreme Court on Monday.

In an affidavit submitted before the court, the government argued that the Supreme Court’s 2017 decision, which declared ‘triple talaq’ invalid, has not sufficiently reduced the number of divorces resulting from this practice.

The government said that victims of triple talaq are left with no recourse other than going to the police, who are unable to take action due to the lack of punitive measures in the law. The affidavit stressed the urgent need for stricter legal provisions to address this issue.

“Victims of ‘triple talaq’ have no option but to approach the police… and the police were helpless as no action could be taken against husbands in the absence of punitive provisions in the law. In order to prevent (this) there was an urgent need for stringent (legal) provisions,” the Centre said.

This affidavit was in response to a petition challenging the necessity of criminalising triple talaq as the Supreme Court has already declared it invalid.

The petition, filed earlier this month by the Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema, which describes itself as “an association of eminent Sunni scholars”, argues that the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, is unconstitutional. The petitioners claim the Act infringes on fundamental rights, including equality before the law and freedom from religious discrimination.

In a detailed rebuttal, the government firmly rejected these claims. It argued that triple talaq violates the fundamental rights and equality guaranteed to women by the Constitution.

“The Parliament, in its wisdom, enacted the impugned Act to protect rights of married Muslim women being divorced by ‘triple talaq’, and the law in question helps ensuring the larger constitutional goals of gender justice and equality of married Muslim women,” the affidavit added.

The Supreme Court had held earlier that it cannot go into the wisdom of laws passed by Parliament or enter into discussions as to what the law should be, the affidavit said.

“It is the function of the legislature alone to determine what is and what is not good and proper for the people of the land and they must be given widest latitude to exercise their functions within the limit of their powers else all progress is barred…” the government argued.

“Whether or not a particular type of conduct ought to be criminalised, and what punishment is to be imposed for such conduct is to be determined by the legislature in light of prevailing social circumstances…”