Introduction
In Islamic law, marriage is not merely a contract but a deeply spiritual and legal institution. It is expected to be protected, respected, and nurtured. Yet, like in any human relationship, conflicts may arise, and sometimes the relationship may become irreparable. Islam, while discouraging divorce, accepts it as a last resort. Among the many forms of divorce available under Muslim personal law, Talaq-e-Sunnat and Talaq-e-Biddat have always attracted the most attention—both in scholarly debates and courtroom discussions. While the former is aligned with the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), the latter developed as a later innovation and has been at the center of socio-legal controversies in India.
This blog attempts to provide a comprehensive understanding of both forms of talaq, analyzing their origins, theological and legal acceptability, evolution in India, and the impact they have had on the lives of Muslim women. In doing so, we also examine the significant developments in recent Indian jurisprudence, including the historic Shayara Bano case.
The Concept of Divorce in Islam
Before we compare the two forms of talaq, it is necessary to understand the Islamic view of divorce itself. Islam recognizes marriage as a sacred and solemn bond but does not idealize it to the point of making it indissoluble. Divorce is allowed, but only when reconciliation efforts have failed. This principle is evident from several verses in the Quran that stress mediation, waiting periods, and fairness when ending a marriage.
One of the clearest verses comes from Surah Al-Baqarah (2:229): “Divorce is twice, then keep her in an acceptable manner or release her with good treatment.” The verse not only implies a staged approach but also instructs the believer to act with dignity and justice. This staged and deliberate method of divorce is the foundation of Talaq-e-Sunnat, which is why it is often referred to as the proper or orthodox method of divorce.
Understanding Talaq-e-Sunnat
Talaq-e-Sunnat literally means divorce in accordance with the Prophet’s traditions. It is based on the Quran and Hadith and is considered the most appropriate and morally acceptable method of dissolving a marriage in Islamic jurisprudence. This form emphasizes patience, reflection, and reconciliation and is followed by most Sunni schools of law, particularly the Hanafi school.
In practice, Talaq-e-Sunnat is of two types: Ahsan and Hasan. Both methods require the husband to pronounce talaq during the wife's tuhr (period of purity) and to avoid physical relations during the iddat period. In Ahsan talaq, a single pronouncement is made followed by abstinence and waiting. If reconciliation occurs during the waiting period, the divorce is revoked. If not, the divorce becomes final after the iddat. In Hasan talaq, the husband pronounces talaq three times in three separate periods of purity, providing multiple opportunities to reconcile.
What makes Talaq-e-Sunnat stand out is its revocability and the opportunity it offers both parties to reconsider the decision. This approach aligns with the Quranic emphasis on fairness, caution, and justice in the process of separation. Because of this, scholars regard it as the only acceptable way for a Muslim man to divorce his wife without violating religious principles.
We have explored the broader understanding of Nikah and Divorce under Muslim law in our previous blog, Concept of Marriage (Nikah) under Muslim Law.
Understanding Talaq-e-Biddat
In contrast to the measured approach of Talaq-e-Sunnat, Talaq-e-Biddat is an instant and irrevocable form of divorce. It involves the pronouncement of the word “talaq” three times in one sitting or occasion, without any gap or waiting period. Once pronounced, the marriage is considered dissolved immediately and irreversibly, even if the husband uttered the words in anger or under emotional distress.
The term biddat itself indicates innovation, suggesting that this form of divorce was not part of the Prophet's teachings but emerged later during the Umayyad dynasty. It was introduced primarily as a practical measure to curb the misuse of revocable divorce, but over time it became a widely used, albeit controversial, practice.
What makes Talaq-e-Biddat deeply problematic is its finality. There is no opportunity for the couple to reconcile or for elders to intervene and mediate. If the husband regrets the decision and wishes to remarry his wife, the only option is through halala—a practice where the woman must marry another man, consummate that marriage, get divorced, and then remarry her first husband. This practice has been severely criticized, both from legal and ethical standpoints.
The abruptness and finality of triple talaq have often led to exploitation, especially of women from disadvantaged backgrounds. Stories abound where women have been divorced over a phone call, text message, or even on social media—practices that clearly contradict the ethical and legal framework envisioned in Islamic sources.
Scholarly and Global Rejection of Triple Talaq
It is important to understand that Talaq-e-Biddat is not universally accepted within the Muslim world. The majority of Islamic scholars, especially from the Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali schools, do not recognize this form of divorce as valid. Even within the Hanafi school, which does permit triple talaq, there is significant internal debate regarding its morality and legitimacy.
Globally, many Muslim-majority countries have reformed or abolished the practice. Egypt, under Law No. 25 of 1929, was one of the first to legislate that triple talaq would be considered a single revocable divorce. Pakistan followed with its Muslim Family Laws Ordinance of 1961. Indonesia, Tunisia, and Bangladesh have also adopted similar reforms. The overwhelming consensus is that triple talaq is inconsistent with the Quranic guidance and the Prophet’s teachings.
Triple Talaq in India: The Shayara Bano Case
In India, the issue reached the courtroom with the landmark case of Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017). Shayara Bano, a Muslim woman from Uttarakhand, was unilaterally divorced by her husband through triple talaq. She filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the practice, arguing that it violated her fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution.
The Court constituted a five-judge bench to hear the matter, and in a 3:2 majority, it declared Talaq-e-Biddat unconstitutional. The judgment held that the practice was arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of constitutional guarantees. Justice Kurian Joseph, in his opinion, stated that triple talaq is not essential to Islam and thus not protected under Article 25.
The case was a turning point in India’s legal history and Muslim personal law jurisprudence. It not only struck down an outdated and patriarchal practice but also reaffirmed the constitutional commitment to gender justice and equality. We have explored the larger implications of this case in detail in our earlier post, Triple Talaq and Shayara Bano Judgment: A Legal Revolution.
Legislative Response: The 2019 Act
Following the Supreme Court verdict, the Indian Parliament passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019. The law declared triple talaq as illegal and void, and made it a cognizable and non-bailable offence punishable with imprisonment up to three years. It also provided for subsistence allowance and custody of children to the divorced woman.
The Act was a decisive move to deter the practice and protect the rights of Muslim women. However, it also faced criticism for criminalizing a civil matter. Critics argued that instead of offering protection, the law may be used vindictively or may lead to the imprisonment of Muslim men for what was essentially a family dispute.
Nonetheless, the law stands today as a legal shield against arbitrary and unilateral divorce, aligning India with other progressive Muslim nations.
Comparative Reflection: Why Talaq-e-Sunnat is Preferred
When we examine the theological roots, legal rationale, and humanitarian considerations, Talaq-e-Sunnat emerges as the preferred and legitimate form of divorce. It allows time, space, and reflection. It provides room for families and community leaders to mediate and save the marriage. It respects both partners and ensures that the sanctity of marriage is not reduced to a hasty verbal declaration.
On the other hand, Talaq-e-Biddat short-circuits all due process. It grants excessive power to one party, with no accountability or consequences. This imbalance not only contradicts Islamic teachings but also undermines the principles of justice enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
Conclusion
Divorce is a difficult chapter in any marriage. But how it is handled reflects the values of the society and the legal system that governs it. Talaq-e-Sunnat, as prescribed by the Quran and practiced by the Prophet (PBUH), upholds justice, dignity, and mercy. It embodies the spirit of Islam in letter and action. Talaq-e-Biddat, on the other hand, is a departure from those values and had become a tool for injustice and exploitation—until it was finally outlawed in India.
The debate surrounding these two forms of talaq is not just about theology or tradition. It is about the lived realities of countless Muslim women, their rights, and their dignity. As India moves toward a more inclusive and rights-based legal order, the journey that began with the Shayara Bano case is a reminder that even centuries-old practices must align with justice and equality.
In our next blog, we will continue exploring divorce under Muslim law by examining Talaq by Wife, including Khula and Talaq-e-Tafweez. Read it here.
