Triple Talaq case: The Muslim judge in the bench remained mute throughout the hearing!

Court and judiciary are meant to provide justice to people, we believe that judges when hearing any case, will keep aside their emotions and background and give verdict only based on merit of the case.

But lately the judiciary in our country  has become one of the most untrustable body with rampant corruption, nepotism and lost transparency. The Judiciary which has to be most active to help people get justice on time has only become more lethargic in the years which has made people lose hope with the institution.

Now, the triple talaq case which is being heard by the Supreme court has a bench of 5 judges with multiple faiths. The bench consists of a Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Sikh and a parsi judge. The Triple talaq case entered the sixth day on Friday May 19th, but it is found that the Muslim judge Justice Abdul Nazeer did not speak a word questioning the lawyers, he never asked for any clarifications on the issue nor did he show interest in the case as reported by people inside the court.

While all the other judges freely interacted with the lawyers and asked questions pertaining to triple talaq, Abdul Nazeer never uttered a single word even on the sixth day of the hearing. The people in the court felt he was not ready to raise questions against triple talaq and never wanted to upset his community members.

Some members said that Justice Kurein Joseph suddenly made a statement saying that equal importance must be shown to sacred days of all religions, was the most vociferous. He was the same judge who had skipped the Chief Justices Conference in 2015 protesting at the event being scheduled on Good Friday and writing a letter to PM to reschedule the event.

While the AIMPLB kept arguing that Muslim practices cannot be decided by courts, Justice Abdul Nasser did not object him for disrespecting the courts. But when the petitioner against triple talaq, raised an apprehension that tomorrow there would be a Hindu Personal Law Board to take a rigid stand on Hindu practices. The bench stopped him and said, “You are a lawyer, don’t argue this.”

 But the petitioner did not stop and went on to say “The SC has to walk the razor’s edge, there is no escaping this.”
But CJI Khehar immediately replied saying, “If we walk the razor’s edge, we will be cut into two.”
Now, in what way does it look this bench is being neutral? One judge doesn’t even open his mouth because he doesn’t want to show he is against his community, another judge wants to speak on Christian rights. But no one wants discussion on triple talaq. A lawyer is asked to keep quiet when he raises relevant questions, but doesn’t speak a word when Kapil Sibal compares Lord Ram with triple talaq.
Looks like the Supreme Court is more worried about appeasement politics than giving justice to innocent women suffering due to triple talaq. Our courts did not even hang the juvenile rapists who invented the most brutal way to kill a person.
Probably this is the reason Supreme Court never wants live telecast of any proceeding unlike the courts of America or even International Court of Justice.

God save our country!

Aishwarya S