The Supreme Court on Wednesday set the stage for a wide debate on the issue of triple talaq, assuring the Muslim women, who are petitioners before the court, that if need be, the court will reconsider its previous decision that exempted religious personal laws from judicial review.

With more and more Muslim women joining the chorus to put an end to the discriminatory practice of triple talaq under the Muslim personal law where a Muslim man can divorce his wife by repeating talaq thrice, the apex court felt that the issue was "important" and required serious consideration of views on both sides.

The bench of Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justice AM Khanwilkar allowed all persons and Muslim bodies interested to put forth their point of view and decided to have preliminary hearing of the issue after eight weeks. "The issue is important as it affects large section of society. Strong views exist on both sides and so we will hear all who want to be heard."

Senior advocate Indira Jaising, who supported the cause of the Muslim women petitioners, told the Court that in 1952, the Bombay High Court had held that personal laws are not "laws" as defined under Article 13 of the Constitution and hence cannot be appealed before any court of law. Even in subsequent decisions, the apex court had maintained that personal laws cannot be appealed against and this will act as a bar in entertaining these petitions.

The bench assured Jaising, "We have an open mind. This issue needs a larger debate. Only after we conduct a preliminary hearing can we determine the scope of whether the view on personal laws required reconsideration by a larger bench of this Court."

Ironically, the validity of triple talaq came up for debate on a concern expressed by a Supreme Court judge in his judgment in October 2015 relating such a practice to gender discrimination. It was since taken up suo moto by the Court and subsequently Muslim women joined with the issue by filing separate petitions.

The All India Muslim Personal law Board has opposed such petitions. Pained by the Board's open criticism of women opposing Muslim law in the media, one Farah Faiz, a lawyer by profession, approached apex court with a plea to restrain such "media trial" on the issue. The bench refused to pass any orders to this effect.