In recent times two landmark judgments in the law of court uphold the testament of the Indian Judiciary System. The first one is about granting alimony to a divorced Muslim Woman and the other is about Religious Conversion. Both the judgments in the backdrop of the Indian Societal System are very pertinent and will be some essential input for the development of the country in future.

What is Marriage and why is essential?

Marriage is a recognised pious relation between male and female for the creation of life but is being interpreted in various ways at different parts of the world and also have been defined in the doctrine of many religious texts in their own narratives.

In some beliefs, marriage is the union of two souls of opposite gender whereas in the Islam it is a contract between husband and wife. This contract also varies in nature in different parts of the world but whatever is the nature, it is the contract between two.

As India is a multicultural, multireligious country, so, here the behavioural pattern is also different but the secular country is governed by common legislation which gives due importance to equality to all individuals but even many times, it is observed that dispute arises because of religious belief make the situation complicated.

Recently a court case was fought by a Muslim divorced woman for alimony from her separated husband which was challenged by the groom in the religious fervor but the Hon'ble Court dismissed the narrative of religious doctrine and viewed the case as per the law of land, upholding the commitment of 'right to equality' enshrined in the Constitution and delivered judgment favouring divorcee. In the judgment, the Hon'ble Court said that the right of a woman cannot be ignored in the name of religious rules and the same law of the land to be applicable as it is for other women of other religions in the country. So, the Hon'ble Court rejected the arguments and pleas of the husband.

What was the case?

A divorcee of Telangana was denied maintenance after the divorce. Argument given that during the marriage, as per the Muslim System, the groom gives Mahr, so, the lady cannot claim for additional monetary support. Moreover, the groom further said that as per Muslim Personal Law, which was framed taking a cue from the Quran, the divorced lady can get alimony for the period of Idaat only. It was further brought to the notice of the Bench that this Personal Law was brought to the ambit of National Law in 1986 after the dispute of the Shah Bano case. They again placed on the table the 1968 Law which gives the right to stop monetary support to the divorcee.

What is Idaat?

Idaat is a period granted by Islam that a Muslim Devorcee or a Muslim Widow, have to wait for her remarriage for a specific period of time. It is more precisely mentioned that a period of four months and ten days (lunar calendar) or three consecutive menstrual periods needs to wait for the lady to get her remarriage.

Argument at Courts:

The argument before court was placed that Mahr has already been given, so, the question of monetary support to give for life long does not arise. Moreover, Islamic Law permits for the Idaat period only but all those arguments were turned down by the Hon'ble Court and ordered to give maintenance, mentioning that religious rule cannot be viewed in such case as Section 125 of CrPC gives guarantee for alimony to all eligible individual.

The court did not want to judge the case as separate than other such cases in the country and delivered the judgment according to the Indian Legislation. The court did not want to give importance to any religious rule and keeping the dignity of the divorcee in high esteem ordered for alimony. In the opinion of the Hon'ble judges, the ladies have the equal right and dignity in the family. They cannot be denied of their legitimate claim

Does Islam ignore women's dignity?

Before the arrival of Prophet Muhammad, the Arabian ladies were treated like chattels and denied all rights and heirship of the family. An Arab male could marry a number of girls only for enjoyment which was modified and controlled by the well-thought and wisdom of the Prophet. He restricted the number of marriages to only four. He introduced Mahr for the protection of ladies. By including the provision of remarriage of Muslim Girls, He laid the foundation of the woman's dignity but even then, considering the advancement of the world, some more Reformations are required at present day, of which alimony is one of them.

Does only Islam need Reformation?

Before talking about the Muslim Reformation, let us dip into the Hindu Religion for reference.

In the Hindu religion also many injustices were there. Sati, Polygyny,( In Ramayana King Dasharatha had many wives), Polyandry (In Mahabharatha, Draupadi had five husbands), etc, which were prevailing in the Hindu faith believers, have been abolished and moreover the Hindus did not make any separate Religious Board based on Manu Samhita. Reposed faith to State Rule but the Muslim Community prefers to have their own Law Board according to the script of their Religious Doctrine.

All other religions also reposed faith in the Rule of the Land but the Muslims still rely on their traditional belief.

The Hindus not only abolished Polygamy but Cruel Sati Burning was also eliminated. Introduced Widow Marriage. Child marriage which was very much in common amongst the Hindus has been controlled though could not be eliminated fully but even for this the Hindus did not form any Personal Board but have full faith in State Law.

But in the Muslim Community, still, many restrictions prevail which the staunch clergy and a section of obstinate people refuse to accept for Reformation. Recently outlawing Triple Talaq and today's judgment on Alimony are definitely a bold step to honour the Muslim Women.

This remarkable judgment pushes us one step closer to bringing the Uniform Law for all citizens of the country. Earlier, on many occasions, especially with the Shah Bano case, the country could not stand beside her because the judgment of the court was diluted by the Government bringing the Muslim Personal Law into Judicial ambit but the recent judgment of allowing alimony is a welcome step towards upholding the dignity of woman and also bringing nation one-step closer to UCC.

Case Number 2:

In the Constitution 'Right to Freedom' and 'Right to Religion' are granted to all individuals but it is not permitted to convert any individual or group of other religious beliefs by luring and coercion.

In India, many such incidents happened earlier. Recently, it was reported that a man was on duty for converting the other believers to Christianity which was viewed strongly by Allahabad High Court and denied bail to the miscreant.

Earlier, in India, many such forcible conversions occurred despise the strong objection of the individuals, thus the demography, culture and habits of locality and state have been changed. The identity of a specific race and community have been put under great challenge and in some cases, enmity also developed between the clans and families.

But, if anybody willingly accepts the other religion then the nation will not object to the conversion.

It was reported that Kailash took an ill Ramphal from Hamirpur, UP to Delhi for treatment. But when after some days brother was not returning then Ramphal's sister came to know that her brother was converted to Christianity in a congregation in Delhi but Kailash was refusing the charge.

The court on hearing, came to know that such types of congregation are very often organised and people like Kailash, in exchange of money, take some innocent intentionally for wrongful conversion which is not permitted by the Constitution.

Counter argument placed that article 25 allows for propagation of religion but the bench observed that propagation and conversion cannot be spelt together.

In many states Anti Conversion Laws have been introduced which prohibit such types of conversions and declare them illegal. This Rule was challenged at Apex Court citing that minority communities will be threatened by majority believers and would be forbidden to hold their religious function which was negated by Apex Court and declared the Law Constitutional.

The Allahabad High Court after hearing all sides and considering the gravity of the case made remark that if such a congregation is allowed a one-day majority community will be found in the minority and refused to give Bail to Kailash.

It is again a very bold decision by the judiciary which came forward to protect the culture, and ethics of a religious community thus protecting the identity of all individuals and races.

.    .    .