The Supreme Court has directed all States and Union Territories to file a status report on whether they have framed rules under Section 4 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937. The Court noted that authorities have not implemented the provision uniformly across the country.
A Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Augustine George Masih raised the issue while hearing a civil appeal. The Bench observed that several States and Union Territories appear to have failed to operationalise Section 4 of the 1937 Act.
“It has been brought to our notice that Section 4 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 has not been implemented by all States and Union Territories,” the Court recorded.
The Bench directed standing counsel for the States and Union Territories to verify the factual position regarding the framing of rules. The Court also instructed them to share the information with Additional Solicitor General Archana Pathak Dave. She will collate the material and submit a consolidated status report before the next hearing.
Statutory Framework Under the Shariat Act
Section 3 of the 1937 Act allows a Muslim to submit a declaration before a prescribed authority. Through this declaration, a person may choose to be governed by Shariat law in matters such as marriage, divorce, maintenance, dower, guardianship, gifts, trusts, and inheritance. Once the authority accepts the declaration, Muslim Personal Law governs the individual and their descendants in these matters.
Section 4 requires State Governments to frame rules that specify the authority before whom such declarations may be made. If a State fails to frame these rules, individuals cannot effectively exercise the option available under Section 3.
Background of the Appeal
The issue arose in a civil appeal challenging a 2011 Delhi High Court judgment. The High Court had set aside a Will dated 1992 propounded by the appellant, Smt. Gohar Sultan, daughter of the deceased testatrix, Mst. Nawab Begum.
The High Court invalidated the Will because the sole attesting witness turned hostile. As a result, the appellant failed to meet the proof requirements under the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The Court also noted that the testatrix had not executed a declaration under Section 3 of the Shariat Act. Therefore, the Will had to satisfy the attestation requirements under the Indian Succession Act, which mandates two attesting witnesses.
Statutory Vacuum Raised Before the Supreme Court
Counsel for the appellant argued before the Supreme Court that a statutory vacuum exists. He submitted that the testatrix could not file a declaration under Section 3 because the State of Uttar Pradesh had not framed rules under Section 4 of the 1937 Act.
After hearing this submission, the Bench decided to examine whether States and Union Territories have complied with their statutory obligation. The Court had earlier sought responses from the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Union Government.
The matter will be heard next on March 18, 2026.
Cause Title: Smt. Gohar Sultan v. Sheikh Anis Ahmad & Anr.
