PIL questions validity of sharia courts

Describing them as ‘kangaroo courts’ where neither sharia nor regular law prevails and was more about money and muscle power, the PIL submitted that divorces are granted at will and even property disputes are settled in a single sitting. 

First bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan on hearing the plea issued notices to the Tamil Nadu home secretary, director-general of police and Chennai city commissioner of police on the matter returnable within five weeks. 

When the PIL, filed by Abdur Rahman, an MBA-holder from the United Kingdom, came up for admission on Wednesday, his senior counsel A Sirajudeen said it had been filed to safeguard the interests of a large number of innocent Muslims who were silently suffering because of the functioning of Makka Masjid Shariat Council and similar forums across the state. 

The PIL submitted that by its name and by various publicity methods, the council has created an impression in the minds of local Muslims that it had been functioning in accordance with Sharia and all its orders and judgments were religiously binding upon Muslims and they were also legal. 

Pointing out the setting of the said Sharia court was similar to other courts with an elevated dais for the presiding officer, who appears in robes like judges, but in different colour, Rahman in his petition said “Muslims facing family disputes are strongly and religiously encouraged to approach it by giving their complaints and on receiving them, the council would send ‘summons’ and also call the opposite party over phone. Under the name of religious injunction, the parties are forced to appear before it.” 

Narrating has own experience, Raman said though he too believed it was an authentic forum and approached it with a plea to reunite with his wife, the council forced him to sign a letter stating that he was willing for talaq and based on it talaq was pronounced.