In a significant reaffirmation, the Supreme Court of India has once again made it clear that bodies like ‘Court of Kazi’, ‘Court of (Darul Kaja) Kajiyat’, and ‘Sharia Courts’ have no legal recognition in India, and any decisions or directions issued by them are unenforceable under law.
A bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah reiterated the 2014 judgment in Vishwa Lochan Madan v Union of India, which had already declared that Shariat courts and fatwas lack any legal sanction.
The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by a woman challenging a decision of the Allahabad High Court, which had upheld the Family Court’s dismissal of her maintenance claim under Section 125 CrPC.
The Family Court had relied on a compromise deed filed before a ‘Court of Kazi’ to conclude that she was the cause of the marital dispute and therefore not entitled to maintenance.
Criticizing the Family Court’s approach, Justice Amanullah, writing for the bench, pointed out that the compromise before the Kazi Court had no legal standing.
The judgment firmly stated, “The only way such a declaration or decision can withstand scrutiny in the eye of law could be when the affected parties voluntarily act upon it, provided it does not conflict with any other law. Even then, it remains valid only between the parties involved and not against third parties.”
The case involved a marriage solemnized according to Islamic customs in 2002.
Following disputes, the husband filed for divorce first in 2005 and again in 2008, both before informal Sharia forums.
Meanwhile, the wife approached the Family Court seeking maintenance.
In 2009, the husband pronounced talaq following proceedings before the Darul Kaja Court.
The Supreme Court found several flaws in the Family Court’s reasoning. It criticized the presumption that since it was a second marriage for both parties, no dowry demand could have been made, calling such a notion “unknown to the canons of law” and “based on conjecture.”
Furthermore, it observed that the compromise deed did not record any admission of fault by the wife, contrary to the Family Court’s assumption.
Holding the Family Court’s findings as unsustainable, the Supreme Court directed the husband to pay Rs. 4,000 per month as maintenance from the date the petition was originally filed.
