1. Shaheen, a Shia Muslim, married Sohail, a Sunni Muslim, in 2006. They had disagreements over Shaheen wanting to have a child and stay at home.
2. In 2010, during an argument over this issue, Sohail divorced Shaheen through triple talaq, which Shaheen argues is not valid under Shia law.
3. Shaheen filed cases seeking to invalidate the divorce and remain in the apartment where they lived. Sohail argued the Domestic Violence Act is unconstitutional as it gives women rights beyond iddat.
1. Shaheen, a Shia Muslim, married Sohail, a Sunni Muslim, in 2006. They had disagreements over Shaheen wanting to have a child and stay at home.
2. In 2010, during an argument over this issue, Sohail divorced Shaheen through triple talaq, which Shaheen argues is not valid under Shia law.
3. Shaheen filed cases seeking to invalidate the divorce and remain in the apartment where they lived. Sohail argued the Domestic Violence Act is unconstitutional as it gives women rights beyond iddat.
1. Shaheen, a Shia Muslim, married Sohail, a Sunni Muslim, in 2006. They had disagreements over Shaheen wanting to have a child and stay at home.
2. In 2010, during an argument over this issue, Sohail divorced Shaheen through triple talaq, which Shaheen argues is not valid under Shia law.
3. Shaheen filed cases seeking to invalidate the divorce and remain in the apartment where they lived. Sohail argued the Domestic Violence Act is unconstitutional as it gives women rights beyond iddat.
1. Shaheen, a Shia Muslim, married Sohail, a Sunni Muslim, in 2006. They had disagreements over Shaheen wanting to have a child and stay at home.
2. In 2010, during an argument over this issue, Sohail divorced Shaheen through triple talaq, which Shaheen argues is not valid under Shia law.
3. Shaheen filed cases seeking to invalidate the divorce and remain in the apartment where they lived. Sohail argued the Domestic Violence Act is unconstitutional as it gives women rights beyond iddat.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 9
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS :
Following is the chronology of events in the Shaheen & Sohail
case:
1. November 11, 2006: Sohail & Shaheen a Shia Muslim
got married at Nakpur, Bundelia Pradesh in Republic of Industan. 2. November 11, 2006: Sohail & Shaheen a Shia Muslim got married at Nakpur, Bundelia Pradesh in Republic of Industan. 3. Shaheen, a shia Muslim married Sohail, a sunni Muslim on November 11, 2006 at Nakpur, Bundelia Pradesh in Republic of Industan. Shaheen is cousin sister of Afreen who is Sohail’s cousin sister on the maternal side. Both Shaheen and Sohail are graduates from a reputed college of Navi Dally University. Sohail is also a qualified chartered accountant. At the time of their marriage, which was an arranged marriage, Sohail was working with one of the big four accounting firms in Bangalore. Shaheen was working as a manager at a leading retail chain. In January, 2009, Sohail relocated to Navi Dally with his wife Shaheen, and has set up a registered partnership enterprise Sohail & Sahil Associates with his college friend Sahil. Sohail and Shaheen live in a 1BHK apartment which is owned by his brother Amir in Greater Palash, but whose electricity charges, house tax, water tax and maintenance are all paid by Sohail. Amir is a permanent resident of United Kingdom and is a doctor with NHS Trust. Sohail and Shaheen had jointly applied for a flat in Navi Dally Development Authority Vikas Scheme, 2010 and have got a flat in lottery in Vistar Vihar Extension – Phase 3. After moving to Navi Dally in January, 2009, Shaheen has been wanting to have a child and stay at home, to which Sohail does not agree. They have been having frequent heated arguments about this. Shaheen has discussed this with her mother, who has also tried to make Sohail understand the issue. Sohail, however, has been unrelenting and considers it too early. Since Afreen had played a vital role in getting them married, she also visited the couple, at Shaheen’s mother’s instance, at their residence in Greater Palash and unsuccessfully attempted to intervene between the two on September 29, 2010. It appears that Afreen being an ambition professional herself was inclined to support Sohail. On November 10, 2010, Sohail and Shaheen again had a heated argument over the same issue. After the argument, Sohail went downstairs for a walk. He returned after two hours and divorced Shaheen with three pronouncements of “talaq”. Afreen was a witness to this development and till today continues to live in the said apartment. Thereafter, Sohail has moved out of the house in Greater Palash where he lived with Shaheen, and has been living in a guest house which is available at nominal rent from his partnership firm. On December 1, 2010, Shaheen filed an application under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (“Domestic Violence Act, 2005”) before the Magistrate in Navi Dally seeking to restrain Sohail and Afreen from, directly or indirectly through agents, dispossessing her from the apartment in Greater Palash in Navi Dally. Shaheen had also approached the civil court seeking a declaration that divorce pronounced by Sohail not being in conformity with the Islamic law be declared as a nullity. In addition to defending the above arguments, Sohail has argued that Domestic Violence Act, 2005 to the extent that it gives rights to women beyond the period of iddat is against his fundamental right to practise his religion. Afreen has argued that being Shaheen’s relative she cannot be made a respondent under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. In December, 2011, while Shaheen’s application under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 has been allowed, her civil suit for declaration has been dismissed. Thus, writ petitions have been filed both by Shaheen and Sohail before the Navi Dally High Court which have been connected by a court order and are listed together for final disposal. The polity and societal structures of Republic of Industan are identical to that of Republic of India and the provision of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the Constitution of Industan are in pari materia with the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the Constitution of India. I N D E X
Sr.No. Contents Page Number
1 Index of Authorties List of Abbreviations Statement of Jurisdiction Synopsis of Facts Statement of Issues Summary of Arguments Argument in Advance Whether the Divorce not being in in conformity with Islamic Law be Declared as a Nullity? That Triple-talaq is not recognized under the Holy Quran, under any source of Shia Law and that the requisite procedure for talaq under theQuran was not followed.
The court should grant relief to Shaheen under the Domestic ViolenceAct, 2005. .............................................................................................. Error Bookmark not defined.
B.
That the cousin can be made a respondent under the Act
Error Bookmarknot defined.
C.
That the apartment in Greater Palash comes under the definition of
“shared household” under section 2(s) of the Act. .......................................................... 4
D.
That the court should pass a protection order under Section 18 andresidence order under Section 19 of the Act ....................... Error Bookmark not defined.
PRAYER .......................................................................................................................... ............ XI
