Mumbai gets its first Shariah court to settle civil, marital disputes

[mirage2K]

MUMBAI: The city is set to get its first Darul Qaza or Shariah court to settle civil and marital disputes in the Muslim community. The court, set up by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, will be inaugurated on Monday at Anjuman-i-Islam, near CST, and will serve to fill a long-felt need of the community.

Shariah courts already function at many places in the country, such as Hyderabad, Patna and Malegaon. Here qazis appointed by the AIMPLB hear the community's various disputes, barring criminal cases, and deliver judgements. "This court will function to settle mainly family disputes pertaining to marriage, divorce and inheritance. Marriage disputes will be settled quickly and the couples will be told to either reconcile or separate if reconciliation is not possible. It will save the community much time and money as fighting cases in civil courts is expensive and time-consuming," said AIMPLB secretary Maulana Wali Rahmani.

For a dispute to be heard by a Shariah court, both the parties in the dispute will have to approach the court. If one of the parties has approached a civil court, then it will have to withdraw the case for the Shariah court to accept the matter.

Rahmani said Shariah courts do not compete with the civil courts. "On the contrary, Shariah courts will lower the burden of the civil courts where thousands of cases are pending and the judges are overworked," he said.

Senior advocate and head of AIMPLB's legal cell Yusuf Muchalla called the city's Shariah court a "significant alternative dispute settlement mechanism". "This court will decide within the framework of Muslim personal laws and mainly deal with matrimonial disputes. This is a kind of domestic tribunal set up by the Muslim community." He added that district and high courts in Bihar, Jharkhand, Bengal and Orissa have upheld several decisions given by the Shariah courts established by the Imarat-e-Shariah (House of Shariah) headquartered in Patna. Muchalla maintained that the Shariah courts were well within the law of the land.

'Shariah courts don't compete with civil courts'

For a dispute to be heard by a Shariah court, both the parties in the dispute will have to approach the court. If one of the parties has approached a civil court, then it will have to withdraw the case for the Shariah court to accept the matter.

AIMPLB secretary Maulana Wali Rahmani said Shariah courts do not compete with the civil courts. "On the contrary, Shariah courts will lower the burden of the civil courts where thousands of cases are pending and the judges are overworked," he said.

Senior advocate and head of AIMPLB's legal cell Yusuf Muchalla called the city's Shariah court a "significant alternative dispute settlement mechanism". "This court will decide within the framework of Muslim personal laws and mainly deal with matrimonial disputes. This is a kind of domestic tribunal set up by the Muslim community." He added that district and high courts in Bihar, Jharkhand, Bengal and Orissa have upheld several decisions given by courts established by the Imarat-e-Shariah (House of Shariah) headquartered in Patna. Muchalla said that Shariah courts were within the law of the land.

​Mumbai gets its first Shariah court to settle civil, marital disputes - The Times of India

Please don't thank me for posting this article...i only posted this here to highlight this malice of appeasement...if you people are thanking out joy that India will be turning slowly into an Islamic state...then please keep your thank yous to yourself and if you are thanking for highlighting this social evil...then please thank whole heartedly

 

[A.Rafay]

Congrats to Muslims in Mumbai.

 

[Alpha1]

Mashallah beautiful news!

 

[LURKER]

What next ... separate electorates ?

When we should be working on implementing Uniform civil code our stupid politicians are dragging us to stone age for their vote bank politics.

 

[Sashan]

AIMPLB need to be gotten rid of - Any secular country can't have different civil laws for different religions especially when one of the community's civil laws are not touched at all and all the ills left alone - polygamy, maher, non-maintenance for divorced women etc - Especially for India, it has just inherited the British empire legacy. Not something Indians need to be proud of.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Any Pakistanis getting excited at the dawn of khilafat, pls understand muslim personal law board has always been active in India and doing a fabulous job of keeping muslims backward by their superstitious beliefs and policies.

Mashallah and all that.

 

[Anish1]

run by who? rahul gandhi?

 

[Sashan]

run by who? rahul gandhi?

Rahul Gandhi can try his luck elsewhere inspite of his father doing to a service to the fundamentalists in the community - This is run by fundamentalists of the muslim community - not by forward muslims like Mohammed Arif Khan

 

[Pboy]

Sharia Court :facepalm:

Its a waste IMO.

It is clearly not working in UK, so how do people expect that it will work in India or somewhere else.

In UK, there was clerics who told women to live with abusive husbands and denied to give them a divorce. Its useless, scrap it.

 

[Screambowl]

why dont they recognize 7 phere also legal proof of marriage? Ridiculous

 

[rubyjackass]

What next ... separate electorates ?

When we should be working on implementing Uniform civil code our stupid politicians are dragging us to stone age for thier vote bank politics.

This is not any degrading of the current system. Just part of status-quo. I am happy to see that if one of the claimants want to go to civil court, shariah court will have to give up the case.

AIMPLB need to be gotten rid of - Any secular country can't have different civil laws for different religions especially when one of the community's civil laws are not touched at all and all the ills left alone - polygamy, maher, non-maintenance for divorced women etc - Especially for India, it has just inherited the British empire legacy. Not something Indians need to be proud of.

All these things like maintenance or case against polygamy cannot be claimed even in a normal civil court.

We can argue for days, but India's secularism is different from whatever text book secularism you have read about. Applying different laws to civil cases of different religions is not so bad as you potray with chest-thumping. I am not in favor of such separate civil code. But I am just saying it is not the end of the world.

 

[Peaceful Civilian]

Welcome to Muslims, in India !!

 

[rubyjackass]

Sharia Court :facepalm:

Its a waste IMO.

It is clearly not working in UK, so how do people expect that it will work in India or somewhere else.

In UK, there was clerics who told women to live with abusive husbands and denied to give them a divorce. Its useless, scrap it.

Luckily, in India, domestic abuse is under criminal law. So the only thing preventing an abusive husband to land in jail is his wife's goodness or lack of education.

 

[Sashan]

This is not any degrading of the current system. Just part of status-quo. I am happy to see that if one of the claimants want to go to civil court, shariah court will have to give up the case.



All these things like maintenance or case against polygamy cannot be claimed even in a normal civil court.

We can argue for days, but India's secularism is different from whatever text book secularism you have read about. Applying different laws to civil cases of different religions is not so bad as you potray with chest-thumping. I am not in favor of such separate civil code. But I am just saying it is not the end of the world.

Sorry - you can call it jingoism or chest-thumping or whatever you want and I can call you a psuedo-intellectual or whatever - but lets not go down to that levels and agree to disagree.

 

[rubyjackass]

Sorry - you can call it jingoism or chest-thumping or whatever you want and I can call you a psuedo-intellectual or whatever - but lets not go down to that levels and agree to disagree.

I did not mean chest-thumping in a negative way here. I meant something like 'unwarranted alarm'. Sorry for the choice of words.

I an not even an intellectual, much less of the pseudo variety. Otherwise I would be writing opinion pieces instead of arguing with you here.