New Delhi: The Supreme Court directed the Centre to file its response to a plea by a Muslim woman seeking the right to be governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925, instead of Shariat law.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar, and Justice K.V. Viswanathan on Tuesday granted Solicitor General (SG)Tushar Mehta four weeks to file an affidavit in response to the plea filed by Safiya P.M., the General Secretary of 'Ex-Muslims of Kerala.'
Appearing on behalf of the Centre, Tushar Mehta acknowledged that the petitioner had raised an intriguing legal question.
He highlighted that the petitioner, a born Muslim, claimed that she does not believe in Shariat and views it as a regressive law.
The bench instructed Mehta to file a counter affidavit, and while he initially requested three weeks to take instructions, the court granted four weeks and scheduled the matter for hearing in the week starting May 5.
During the hearing, Mehta defended the criminalisation of triple talaq and referenced the case of Parveen Shakir, a former Pakistani civil service officer and renowned poet who was a victim of triple talaq. Quoting Shakir, he recited:
“Talaq de to rahe ho itaab-o-qahr ke saath, Meri jawani bhi lauta do meri mehr ke saath”
The plea submitted by Safiya P.M. seeks a declaration that Muslim Personal Law would not govern her for matters covered under Sections 2 and 3 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937. According to the petition, there is currently no provision in the Act or its rules that allows for such an exemption.
The petitioner, who was born to a non-practicing Muslim father who has not officially left the religion, expressed concerns about her civil rights being jeopardized.
She highlighted a critical issue faced by Muslims born into the faith. They are automatically governed by the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, she said.
The petitioner pointed out that under Sharia law, individuals who leave the Islamic faith are excluded from their community and lose inheritance rights. She expressed apprehension about the potential implications for her daughter if she officially renounced her religion.
Her plea emphasized that she seeks to safeguard her civil rights and protect her daughter's legal entitlements under a secular legal framework, specifically the Indian Succession Act, 1925, which provides for intestate and testamentary succession.
The court’s decision to seek the Centre’s stand on the matter underscores the complex legal and social issues surrounding personal laws and the rights of individuals who seek to opt for secular legal provisions.
