The Supreme Court has sought responses from the Union Government and the State of Uttar Pradesh on the non-framing of rules under Section 4 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937. According to the Court, the absence of rules may obstruct effective implementation of the statute.
A Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Augustine George Masih issued notice to both authorities. Specifically, the Bench asked whether Uttar Pradesh has operationalised Section 4 of the 1937 Act. The Court observed that without rules, a Muslim may face difficulty in submitting a declaration under Section 3.
Statutory Framework Under the Shariat Act
Section 3 of the 1937 Act permits a Muslim to file a declaration before a prescribed authority stating that he or she wishes to be governed by Shariat law. Such a declaration applies to matters including marriage, maintenance, inheritance, and guardianship. Once accepted, Muslim Personal Law governs the individual and his or her descendants.
However, Section 4 mandates that the State Government frame rules. These rules must identify the competent authority. They must also prescribe the form and procedure for filing declarations.
Therefore, in the absence of rules, the statutory mechanism remains incomplete. The Bench recorded:
“It is brought to our notice that thus far, there is no compliance of Section 4 thereof.”
Challenge To Delhi High Court Judgment
The proceedings arise from an appeal against a 2011 judgment of the Delhi High Court. In that judgment, the High Court invalidated a 1992 Will propounded by the appellant, Gohar Sultan, daughter of the deceased testatrix, Mst. Nawab Begum.
The High Court rejected the Will after the sole attesting witness turned hostile. It held that the Will did not satisfy the proof requirements under the Indian Succession Act, 1925. Furthermore, the Court ruled that the testatrix had not made a declaration under Section 3 of the Shariat Act. Consequently, the Will had to comply with the Indian Succession Act, which requires attestation by two witnesses.
Submissions Before The Supreme Court
Counsel for the appellant submitted that the testatrix could not file a declaration under Section 3. This was because Uttar Pradesh had not framed rules under Section 4. As a result, no procedural mechanism existed to receive such declarations.
In light of this submission, the Bench took note of the statutory gap. It expressed its inclination to implead the Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Legislation, and the State of Uttar Pradesh through its Chief Secretary.
Accordingly, the Court impleaded the State of Uttar Pradesh. It noted that the testatrix belonged to Uttar Pradesh and therefore could not file a declaration due to the absence of rules.
Directions Issued By The Court
The Court directed that the matter be listed on February 18, 2026. Meanwhile, the newly added respondents may file affidavits indicating the latest status regarding the framing of rules.
Cause Title:
SMT. GOHAR SULTAN VERSUS SHEIKH ANIS AHMAD & ANR.
Appearance:
For Appellant(s):
Mr. Rakesh Khanna, Senior Advocate; Mr. M. Khairati, Advocate; Mr. Irshad Ahmad, AOR; Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate; Mr. H.M. Ghouse, Advocate; Mr. Junaid Ali Khan, Advocate; Mr. Shoaib Khan, Advocate.
For Respondent(s):
M/S. Equity Lex Associates, AOR; Mr. Salman Khurshid, Senior Advocate; Mrs. Naghma Imtiaz, Advocate; Mr. Zargham Ahmed, Advocate; Mr. Saif Naseem, Advocate; Mrs. Lubna Naaz, Advocate; Ms. Mariya Mansuri, Advocate; Ms. Sidra Khan, Advocate; Ms. Azra Rehman, Advocate.
