Allahabad High Court:<\/strong> While considering an application filed under Section 482 CrPC the\u00a0Single Bench of Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J. has observed that Talaq by a Muslim husband to\u00a0his wife cannot be made in a manner which may infringe her fundamental rights guaranteed\u00a0under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.<\/p>\n In the instant case, the opposite party had moved a complaint before Addl. Chief Judicial\u00a0Magistrate against her husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law for beating her, ousting her\u00a0from their house, and demanding dowry from her parents. Consequently, Addl. Chief Judicial\u00a0Magistrate, passed an order under Section 204 of CrPC summoning the applicants under Section\u00a0498-A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant contended that since he had divorced his wife by way of Triple Talaq and the same has been\u00a0approved by a Fatwa, the complaint case proceedings were null and void.<\/p>\n The Court observed that the Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution entitle Muslim Women to live\u00a0with dignity and to oppose the arbitrary exercise of the power of Talaq by her husband, such as\u00a0the mere pronouncement of the word \u2018Talaq\u2019 thrice at a time, as allegedly done by the applicant-husband. The Court further added that since a ‘Fatwa’ does not emanate from any judicial system\u00a0recognized by law, it is not binding on anyone. Therefore, the complaint case proceedings could\u00a0not be challenged on the basis of the alleged divorce or the fatwa. Moreover, the statements of\u00a0the opposite party and the witnesses recorded under Section 200 and 202 of CrPC made out a\u00a0prima facie case against the applicants. Hence, the exercise of the power under Section 482 of\u00a0CrPC was not warranted. [Aaqil Jamil v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2017 SCC OnLine All 1325<\/a>, decided on \u00a019.04.2017]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Allahabad High Court: While considering an application filed under Section 482 CrPC the\u00a0Single Bench of Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J. has observed that <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[17461,3268,6501],"class_list":["post-131001","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-arbitrary-exercise","tag-Fundamental_Rights","tag-triple-talaq"],"yoast_head":"\n