Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Aug 20 Holding the Talaq sent electronically as void and illegal and punishable, High Court refused to quash the FIR for Triple Talaq sent to the spouse by the husband via text message.
Justice Javed Iqbal Wani refused the FIR registered in this connection by the wife against the husband in Police Station Kupwara.
The police registered the FIR against the husband on the complaint filed by submitting that the husband had developed an extramarital affair and had sent triple talaq via text messages to the complainant-wife. These messages, supported by screenshots produced during investigation, were treated as evidence of the offence under the Act of 2019.
Justice Wani while refusing to quash such FIR observed that any form of instantaneous and irrevocable Talaq, spoken, written or sent electronically is void, illegal.
“The pronouncement of Talaq whether Talaq-e-biddat or any other similar form of instantaneous and irrevocable divorce by words, whether spoken, written, or through any electronic form, is void and illegal, and punishable with imprisonment for up to three years along with a fine”, court said.
The court dismissed the plea seeking quashing of an FIR registered under the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 against the accused-husband of pronouncing instant Triple Talaq upon his wife via text message.
The petitioner-husband argued that he had executed Talaq-e-Ahsan through a formal Talaq Nama, and had released his wife from the marital tie lawfully under Shariat and the Holy Quran and no offence was made out under Indian Penal Code or the 2019 Act and that the FIR was vague and baseless.
The Court observed that in light of the evidence produced, particularly the screenshots of the text messages, reliance by the petitioner on the talaq nama was insufficient to nullify the FIR.
Accordingly, the petition was dismissed with the Court clarifying that its observations were solely for deciding the quashing plea and should not be interpreted as an opinion on the petitioner’s guilt or innocence.
