APRIL 29, 2025
Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court of India has made it clear that Sharia Courts, Qazi Courts, or Darul Qaza have no legal recognition under Indian law, and no individual is bound to follow their rulings. This landmark decision reaffirms the supremacy of Indian civil and criminal law over religious arbitration systems.
Key Takeaways from the Verdict:
- No Legal Authority: A bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah declared that institutions like Darul Qaza or Sharia Courts cannot enforce their decisions legally, nor do they have the power to compel anyone to follow them.
- Voluntary Acceptance: These decisions are valid only if both parties voluntarily accept them and if such decisions do not violate Indian law.
- No Coercive Power: Referring to a 2014 ruling (Vishwaranjan Madan case), the court stated that such forums cannot use any form of coercion or force to implement their decisions.
Justice Amanullah emphasized:
“Qazi’s court, Darul Qaza, Sharia court—whatever name they are given—they have no recognition under the law.”
Background of the Case:
The judgment came during the hearing of a petition filed by a Muslim woman who sought maintenance from her husband. Her case was dismissed earlier by both the Family Court and the Allahabad High Court.
- Marriage and Divorce: The woman had married in 2002 (second marriage for both). In 2005, the husband attempted to divorce her via a Qazi Court, but it was rejected after an agreement between the two.
- Allegations and Separation: She later alleged dowry harassment and claimed her husband threw her out along with their children in 2008.
- Lower Court Decisions:
- The Family Court granted maintenance for the children but denied it to the woman, stating she had left on her own.
- The High Court upheld this ruling, stating her separation lacked valid justification.
What the Supreme Court Said:
- The Supreme Court disagreed with the lower courts’ interpretation, stating that the agreement lacked a strong basis, and dowry harassment can occur regardless of how many times someone is married.
- The court criticized the reasoning that maintenance could be denied simply because it was a second marriage or because she was living separately.
Why This Matters:
- This judgment sets a precedent that religious arbitration (like rulings by a Qazi or Sharia board) is non-binding unless agreed upon by both parties.
- It also reaffirms that Indian civil laws take precedence over religious personal law, especially in matters like maintenance, marriage, divorce, and custody.
Courtesy/Source: Newspoint / PTI
