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

[Sashan]

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.

My alarms are based on shariah councils in UK and how they drive the muslim women crazy -

BBC One - Panorama, Secrets of Britain's Sharia Councils

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2013/apr/26/panorama-expose-sharia-councils-balance


- beyond that if there is nothing to discuss, lets meet up in other thread.

 

[LURKER]

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.

This is not a progressive step by any means.Instead of taking a step forward we've taken 2 steps backwards. India has a Directive Principle in our constitution to establish a Common civil code in the country. All laws whether criminal or civil should be same for all citizens of India.

This is the reason why common civil code is urgently needed in the country:
Shah Bano case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Shah Bano case was a controversial divorce lawsuit in India, in which Shah Bano, a 62-year-old Muslim woman and mother of five from Indore, Madhya Pradesh, was divorced by her husband in 1978 and was subsequently denied alimony. The case created considerable debate and controversy about the extent of having different civil codes for different religions, especially for Muslims in India. This case caused the [congress] government, with its absolute majority, to pass the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 which diluted the secular judgment of the Supreme Court and, in reality, denied even utterly destitute Muslim divorcées the right to alimony from their former husbands.

 

[rubyjackass]

This is not a progressive step by any means.Instead of taking a step forward we've taken 2 steps backwards. India has a Directive Principle in our constitution to establish a Common civil code in the country. All laws whether criminal or civil should be same for all citizens of India.

This is the reason why common civil code is urgently needed in the country:
Shah Bano case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Shah Bano case was a controversial divorce lawsuit in India, in which Shah Bano, a 62-year-old Muslim woman and mother of five from Indore, Madhya Pradesh, was divorced by her husband in 1978 and was subsequently denied alimony. The case created considerable debate and controversy about the extent of having different civil codes for different religions, especially for Muslims in India. This case caused the [congress] government, with its absolute majority, to pass the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 which diluted the secular judgment of the Supreme Court and, in reality, denied even utterly destitute Muslim divorcées the right to alimony from their former husbands.

I know about the Shah-Bano case. I don't like that there is a separate civil code in matters of alimony(Ironically the act is named Protection of Rights :hitwall).

Directive principles are not enforceable. There is also a directive principle to protect cows and livestock(code for future beef ban, may be?).

I am just saying there is no special harm in this new particular court coming up in Mumbai. Just because earlier they did not implement the law(may be because of laziness) and setup this court, does not mean we were more secular. The law should be changed rather than doing cosmetic changes. If anything, the judgements by this court will be observed keenly and will bring urgency to people to change the law.

My alarms are based on shariah councils in UK and how they drive the muslim women crazy -

BBC One - Panorama, Secrets of Britain's Sharia Councils

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2013/apr/26/panorama-expose-sharia-councils-balance


- beyond that if there is nothing to discuss, lets meet up in other thread.

I agree.

 

[American Pakistani]

Mashallah, finally some good news & victory for indian Muslims, other states should follow.

P.S I hope modi is Okay.

 

[LURKER]

I know about the Shah-Bano case. I don't like that there is a separate civil code in matters of alimony(Ironically the act is named Protection of Rights :hitwall).

Directive principles are not enforceable. There is also a directive principle to protect cows and livestock(code for future beef ban, may be?).

I am just saying there is no special harm in this new particular court coming up in Mumbai. Just because earlier they did not implement the law(may be because of laziness) and setup this court, does not mean we were more secular. The law should be changed rather than doing cosmetic changes. If anything, the judgements by this court will be observed keenly and will bring urgency to people to change the law.

I'm of the opinion to keep religion and state laws separate. Uniform civil code would be a right step in this direction.There may be few provisions in the Hindu law which i may not agree with as these may not be consistent with modern society and laws.

Separate civil laws for muslims already existed before this decision and the cases were heard in the district courts, but now they've set-up separate courts for the purpose. With setting up of separate courts for muslims now it will be even more difficult to establish uniform civil code. We've seen how much hue and cry was made against the SC judgement on shah bano case. So it will be better to separate religion and law altoghther than to tread on this tricky path.

Mashallah, finally some good news & victory for indian Muslims, other states should follow.

P.S I hope modi is Okay.

Don't worry we wont let India to become another Pakistan

 

[American Pakistani]

Don't worry we wont let India to become another Pakistan

Who asked you for that in first place?

BTW remain on topic instead of trolling & dragging Pakistan.

 

[IndoUS]

There should be one court system for everyone. If people want separate law then they should move to country that supports religion based law.

 

[Cyberian]

Ma'Shah'Allah. This is good news for the Muslims of India.

The Islamic Shariah Courts are popping up all over the world in recent years.

 

[SHAMK9]

India is phucked

 

[Solomon2]

Civil cases only? Does the court have the power to impose monetary penalties or jail time?

 

[Anish1]

whats next? will congress say modi should be tried in a sharia court? the way the islamofascist congress is subverting indian democarcy is alarming

 

[Thorough Pro]

Separate ID for indian Muslims

 

[Anish1]

congress is showing its true colours. they are the real muslim league

 

[Bang Galore]

Civil cases only? Does the court have the power to impose monetary penalties or jail time?

Monetary penalties probable but challengeable in higher "secular" courts. Jail time, no.

whats next? will congress say modi should be tried in a sharia court? the way the islamofascist congress is subverting indian democarcy is alarming

Why? Is Modi a muslim? Married to one? Who accepts Sharia? Some of these uninformed comments get boring very quickly. It is an alternative to a civil court litigation, not a criminal one. Congress has nothing to do with it.

Separate ID for indian Muslims

That should be very scary......For Muslims!

 

[darkinsky]

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.

can you just elaborate on your statement, because it seems more like rant, a usul one liner is not excepted

muslims in india are backward beccause of the muslim laws?

dont you think that muslims are not in the main stream of india, and the hindus of india are trying to sideline them, dont you think that the majority which constitues india has the duty to uplift any minority community india has by incentives and all that

even if you compare china to india, india is very backward country with very less development, and too many issues(even with hindus), do you think you can play the blame game so easily? or is it more about the traditions of indian society intolerance for minorities with different sets of cultures and beliefs? they are not so easily 'acceptable', sideline them, and dont make ways for their progress easy

thats what i think of shudras too by the way

we all know how the 'chinese looking minority' of northern eastern states are sidelined as compared to mainstream india, the asian indians are even attacked racially