Supreme Court seeks centre’s response on Muslim Woman’s plea to opt-out of Shariat for succession laws

The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Centre to submit its stance on a plea by a Muslim woman seeking to be governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925, instead of Shariat laws. The petitioner, Safiya P.M., general secretary of “Ex-Muslims of Kerala” and a resident of Alappuzha, argued that her fundamental right under Article 25 of the Constitution includes the “right not to believe” and should allow her to be governed by secular laws in matters of inheritance.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan observed that the plea raises significant constitutional questions that could have implications across religious communities. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta acknowledged the importance of the issue, describing it as an “interesting question.” He sought three weeks to respond, but the bench granted four weeks, setting the next hearing for the first week of May.

Safiya’s plea contends that while Muslim women are entitled to only one-third of their family property under Shariat laws, the Indian Succession Act ensures a more equitable distribution. Although she has not officially renounced Islam, Safiya stated that she identifies as a non-believer and wishes to leave the faith, fearing she and her daughter would be disqualified from inheriting property as per Shariat law.

The petitioner argued that the absence of a legal provision allowing Muslims to officially opt-out of being governed by Muslim personal law creates a statutory vacuum. She requested judicial intervention to address this gap and secure her rights under the Indian Succession Act, irrespective of her religious status.

Safiya’s plea also referenced the Supreme Court’s 2018 judgment in the Sabarimala case, which upheld the right to freedom of religion under Article 25, including the right not to practice any faith. She asserted that her father’s inability to allocate more than one-third of his property to her without court intervention is a violation of her fundamental rights.

The court previously permitted Safiya to amend her petition to include challenges to the Indian Succession Act and Muslim Personal Law provisions. The case is poised to address broader constitutional questions about the intersection of personal laws and individual rights in India.