SC questions implementation of Shariat Act across States and UTs

In a development with far-reaching implications for personal law governance, the Supreme Court has called out the uneven enforcement of Section 4 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 and directed all States and Union Territories to clarify their position. The Court’s intervention came while hearing a civil appeal that exposed a possible statutory gap affecting the ability of Muslims to formally opt for Shariat law in personal matters, a gap that could directly impact succession disputes across the country.

The issue surfaced in an appeal challenging a 2011 ruling of the Delhi High Court, which had rejected a 1992 Will propounded by a daughter on the ground that it failed to meet the strict proof requirements under the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The High Court had reasoned that since the deceased had not made a declaration under Section 3 of the 1937 Act to be governed by Muslim Personal Law, the Will had to satisfy the formal requirements applicable under secular succession law.

Before the Supreme Court, however, it was argued that such a declaration was never feasible because the concerned State had not framed rules under Section 4 of the 1937 Act prescribing the authority before whom such declarations could be made, effectively making compliance impossible.

Taking note of the submission, the Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Augustine George Masih recorded that “the provisions of Section 4 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937… have not been implemented by all States and Union Territories.” The Court directed standing counsel for all States and UTs to verify the factual position and report back. It further ordered that the material be compiled by the Additional Solicitor General into a consolidated status report before the next hearing. The appeal remains pending.