Supreme Court seeks Centre’s stand on ex-Muslims’ succession rights 

Can a person born as Muslim be governed by the Indian Succession Act, a secular law, instead of Shariat, if he/she quits Islam?

A day after the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) came into effect in Uttarakhand, the Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Centre to spell out its stand on the contentious issue raised in a petition filed by Safiya PM, a resident of Alappuzha in Kerala.

“The petitioner lady is a born Muslim. She says she does not believe in the Shariat law and considers it regressive,” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told a bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Viswanathan, noting that the petition raised an interesting question.

“This will run across faiths. You will have to file a counter affidavit, the bench told Mehta, who sought three weeks to take instructions and file the Centre’s response.

Granting four weeks to the Centre to spell out its stand, the bench posted the matter for hearing in the week commencing May 5.

Petitioner Safiya PM – general secretary of ‘Ex-Muslims of Kerala’ — contended that being a non-believer Muslim woman, she wanted to be governed by the secular Indian succession law to deal with her ancestral property rights, instead of Shariat.

The Supreme Court had on April 29, 2024, asked the Centre and the Kerala Government to respond to her petition. It had also asked Attorney General R Venkataramani to appoint a law officer to assist it.

“We cannot give a declaration on personal laws like this to parties. You can challenge the Sharia law provision and we will deal with it then. How can we direct that a non-believer be governed by the Indian Succession Act? This cannot be done under Article 32,” a bench led by the then CJI DY Chandrachud had told the petitioner’s counsel even as it issued notices to the Centre and the Kerala Government on her Safiya’s petition.

Maintaining that she has not officially left Islam, Safiya said she was a non-believer and wanted the enforcement of her fundamental right to religion under Article 25. She asserted that the fundamental right to religion under Article 25 must include “the right not to believe” also.

She has sought a declaration that “the persons who do not want to be governed by the Muslim Personal Law must be allowed to be governed by the secular law of the country i.e. the Indian Succession Act, 1925, both in the case of intestate and testamentary succession”.

Safiya submitted that Muslim women were entitled to one-third share in property under the Shariat law. Her counsel said a declaration that the petitioner was not governed by the Muslim Personal Law has to come from the court; otherwise her father will not be able to give more than one-third of the property.

“My brother is suffering from Down syndrome and will be able to get two-third of the property,” the lawyer said.

For a Hindu, the fact whether one is a believer or a non-believer, is immaterial, and they are governed by the succession law, the court had noted.

“There is no provision for me to get such a declaration as needed under Section 3 of the Shariat Act [Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937],” her counsel had pointed out.

The bench had allowed Safiya to amend her petition suitably to challenge the Indian succession law and other provisions that excluded Muslims.

“The fundamental right of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution must include the right to believe or not to believe, as per the judgment in Indian Young Lawyers Assn v State of Kerala (Sabarimala case)...To have meaning for that right, the person who leaves her faith should not incur any disability or a disqualification in matters of inheritance or other important civil rights,” the petitioner submitted.

“As per the Sharia law, the person who leaves her faith in Islam will be ousted from her community and thereafter not entitled to any inheritance right in her parental property. Further, the petitioner is apprehensive about the application of the law in the case of her lineal descendant, her only daughter, if the petitioner officially leaves the religion,” she contended.