The Supreme Court has asked the Centre to respond within four weeks to a Muslim woman’s petition for a declaration that the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, shall not apply to “those who are ‘non-believers’ in Islam”.
Such non-believers, the petitioner has argued, should be governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
Solicitor-general Tushar Mehta told the apex court that this was “an interesting question” that he would like to address.
A bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna was sceptical about the woman’s plea, saying it would lead to similar petitions from people belonging to other religions.
“This will run across the faiths…. If we apply to one faith, it will apply to all faiths,” the bench, which included Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K.V. Viswanathan, orally observed.
It asked Mehta, appearing for the Centre, to file a counter-affidavit.
Mehta explained to the court that under Sharia law, a person who converts to another religion can bequeath only a portion of his or her property while the petitioner wanted to bequeath her entire property to her daughter.
“It’s an interesting question of law that has arisen. The lady thinks Shariat is a regressive law and wants to be governed by the Indian Succession Act,” the solicitor-general said.
He assured the bench that the government would come out with its views on
the subject.
Justice Khanna, however, underlined that even under the Hindu Succession Act, a person who converts to another religion loses inheritance rights if the property involved belongs to a joint Hindu Undivided Family.
Mehta, however, said that under the Hindu Succession Act, a person who has converted to another religion can still bequeath his or her own property through a will.
The bench posted the next hearing to May 5.
In April last year, a bench headed by the then Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud, had initially expressed reservations about examining the plea of P.M. Safiya, a resident of Alappuzha district and general secretary of the Ex-Muslims of Kerala. The court eventually agreed to hear the petition.
Advocate Prashant Padmanabhan, appearing for Safiya, argued that under Sharia law, a Muslim woman who does not believe in Islam is still obliged to follow the personal law, which is a violation of her fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution.
The Article relates to citizens’ fundamental right to practise and profess one’s conscience, profession, religion and the like.
Padmanabhan said that under Muslim personal law, a person cannot bequeath more than a third of their property through a will. It was argued that the petitioner’s daughter too would not get the entire property as, under personal law, her father’s brothers are entitled to a share of it.
He stressed that Safiya’s father too was a non-believer.
Safiya has argued that non-believers who don’t want to be governed by Muslim personal law must be allowed to be governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925, both in the matter of intestate (where no will exists) and testamentary (as bequeathed in a will) succession.