FORMER SC JUDGE ABDUL NAZEER APPOINTED ANDHRA PRADESH GOVERNOR
Abdul Nazeer is a retired Supreme Court Judge. The President of India appointed him the Governor of the State of Andhra Pradesh under the recommendation of the Prime Minister and his council. Nazeer has been a part of the SC benches that pronounced the Triple Talaq verdict, privacy as a fundamental right case, the AGR case, and the Ayodhya land case.
Contents
• About Abdul Nazeer
• Ayodhya ruling and appointments: An observation
About Abdul Nazeer
Nazeer retired in January 2023. And his appointment comes within a few weeks of his retirement. Justice Nazeer served as the judge of the Karnataka High Court. He was elevated to the SC in 2017. He is a Muslim. The Collegium elevated him to include the minority community in its recommendations. However, his appointment created controversies as he superseded many senior judges. He was included in the Ayodhya bench for the same reason.
During the Triple Talaq ruling, he opinioned that Talaq’s practice is legally valid.
Ayodhya ruling and appointments: An observation
The judges of the bench that heard the Ayodhya ruling are all in key posts after retirement. The former Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi headed the bench and is now the Member of the Rajya Sabha, a nominated member. Justice Ashok Bhushan is now the Chairperson of NCLT (National Company Law Appellate Tribunal). Now Nazeer is being appointed as Governor.
Triple Talaq Case:
The case was called Shayara Bano v. Union of India & Others. The bench that heard the controversial triple talaq case in 2017 was made up of multifaith members. The five judges from five different communities are Chief Justice J. S. Khehar (a Sikh), and Justices Kurian Joseph (a Christian), R. F. Nariman (a Parsi), U. U. Lalit (a Hindu) and S. Abdul Nazeer (a Muslim).
The Supreme Court examined whether Triple talaq has the protection of the constitution—if this practice is safeguarded by Article 25(1) in the constitution that guarantees all the fundamental right to “profess, practice and propagate religion”. The Court wanted to establish whether or not triple talaq is an essential feature of Islamic belief and practice.
In a 397-page ruling, though two judges upheld validity of instant triple talaq (talaq-e-biddat), the three other judges held that it was unconstitutional, thus barring the practice by a 3(Justices Kurian Joseph, R. F. Nariman, U. U. Lalit):2(Justice J. S. Khehar, S. Abdul Nazeer)majority. One judge argued that instant triple talaq violated Islamic law. The bench asked the central government to promulgate legislation within six months to govern marriage and divorce in the Muslim community. The court said that until the government formulates a law regarding instant triple talaq, there would be an injunction against husbands pronouncing instant triple talaq on their wives.