Epigraph:
“Love of your country (patriotism) is a part of your faith.” The Holy Prophet Muhammad
Source:TOI
NEW DELHI: Fatwa issued by Muslim clerics cannot be forced upon people and the state has to protect persons who are harassed for not following such dictates, the Supreme Court on Tuesday said while expressing reservation in interfering with shariat courts.
Holding that it’s a matter of choice for the people to accept fatwa or not, the apex court said running of institutions like Darul Qaza and Darul-Iftaa is a religious issue and the courts should interfere only when someone’s rights are violated by their decision.
“We can protect people who are subjected to suffering due to this. When a pujari gives a date of Dussehra, he cannot force someone to celebrate the festival on that day. If somebody forces themselves on you, then we can protect you,” the bench said after the petitioner pleaded that fatwa issued by clerics is unconstitutional.
It said fatwa issued by clerics or prediction made by pundits do not violate any law and so courts should restrain them from doing so.
“Which law gives power to issue fatwa and which statute gives pundit power to make horoscope? Court can only say that the state will protect the people if one is subjected to suffering due to fatwa,” the bench said adding some fatwas may be issued for the welfare of the people.
“These are political and religious issues and we do not want to go into it,” the bench said while hearing a PIL filed by an advocate Vishwa Lochan Madam, challenging the constitutional validity of shariat courts, for allegedly running a parallel judicial system in the country.
All India personal law board submitted fatwa is bot binding on people and it is just an opinion of Mufti and he has no power and authority to implement it.
Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, appearing for the Board, submitted if a fatwa is sought to be implemented against the wish of the concerned person, then he can approach court of law against it.
The petitioner submitted the fundamental rights of Muslims could not be controlled and curtailed through fatwas issued by qazis and muftis appointed by Muslim organizations.
Categories: Asia, India, Separation of Church and State
Well said SC of India
Yes, it is a great decision by the Supreme Court (SC) of India. It protects the rights of all people, Hindu, Sikh, Christian and Muslim while giving every one liberty to practice their faith.
SC will only interfere if need be.
The decision of Indian SC is appreciated. God said
in Qura,an “No compulsion in religion”. Pakistani
Government should think over it.
All here is one sided Headline and comments. Making it imbalanced. The case was against the Issuing of Fatwa at all, which court rejected saying: “It said fatwa issued by clerics or prediction made by pundits do not violate any law and so courts should restrain them from doing so.”
Court also added: “…Court can only say that the state will protect the people if one is subjected to suffering due to fatwa” which made it look balanced.
We should see the full picture unbaisly otherwise one may ask .. “What if issues of fatwa and DarulQaza are completely banned for Ahmadies?”
fatwas for Ahmadis are issued according to their agreement. In all cases, the litigants are asked if they want to go by qadha or by the country courts. The person decides. If decision is to go by the state courts, the Qadha does not take up the matter at all.
The Indian SC has said that matters concerning the religion remain within the religious domain. Court will not interfere unless some one comes forward with a complaint.
I prefer that some one with better knowledge may please explain the working of Ahmadiyah Qadha matters.
The court in Bangladesh forbade the maulvis to issue any fatwa. That was some years ago.
Darul Ifta – offers Fatwa on different issues. Darul Qaza resolves disputes amongst Ahmadies.
All the mediators do the same as they get agreements from the parties. There are laws every where which allow communities to mediate and decide with out being biased or harsh on people.
Anyways – the point was, some one wanted these institutions to be banned – and court ruled otherwise. But I see here anti maulvi sentimental notes and heading. Anti Ahmadiyya to Suna tha ab Anti Maulvi bhi dekh raha hoon. Allah Rehem kare.
Thank you for explaining. Wassalam.
JazakAllah for your understanding. I wonder some journalist put a twisted Headline and same is forwarded here at Muslim Times too – which is not fair. Moderators must first understand the real issue and then edit as needed. In this Supreme Court Case – had they been agreed with the Complainant, The Institutions of DarulIfta and DarulQaza at Qadian would also be under question!!! And the Supreme Court denied such demands. This was the main topic of the news but I see that the Headline was so twisted and people here were only focused on the second part where they advised the government to protect people’s rights, wrongly affected by some Fatwas or Edicts by Religious Leaders, which is good but we should see the story as a whole. Thanks again!
In my opinion Fatwa and decision on any disputed matter are two different things.
Darul Ifta is a religious court that resolves the disputes according to the religious law of the parties provided the disputing parties agree to accept the ruling. It could be Muslim Laws, Hindu Laws, Christian Laws or Jew law.
Since there are many sects in every religion, therefore, Law of the country to protect the rights of its people is supreme.
I appreciate Indian court ruling.
Majid