A bench led by CJI Suryakant questions if the court can strike down Shariah-based succession rules; senior advocate Prashant Bhushan argues for gender equality
NEW DELHI – The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard a significant petition challenging provisions of Muslim personal law on inheritance, which the petitioners claim discriminate against women by giving them a smaller share compared to men. The plea, filed by an organisation, seeks judicial review of the law on the lines of the 2017 triple talaq judgment that declared instant triple talaq unconstitutional.
Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioners, strongly argued that the current inheritance system under Muslim personal law violates the constitutional principle of gender equality. “It is essential to ensure gender equality in matters of inheritance. Just as this court struck down triple talaq as violative of fundamental rights, it can and should examine this discriminatory practice in succession laws,” he submitted, referring to the Shayara Bano case.
The petitioners contend that daughters, sisters, and widows receive half the share that sons, brothers, or other male relatives get in many situations, which they say breaches Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution guaranteeing equality and non-discrimination.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Suryakant and Justice R. Mahadevan, however, adopted a cautious approach during the hearing. The court raised key questions about the extent of judicial power over personal laws. “Can the court directly declare the constitutional validity of personal law in this manner?” the bench asked. It pointed out that personal laws are closely linked to the right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution.
The judges expressed concern that completely striking down the Muslim inheritance rules could create a legal vacuum. “If we set aside the existing law, what will take its place? There has to be some framework in its absence,” the bench observed. They emphasised that major reforms in personal laws have historically been carried out by Parliament or state legislatures, not through judicial intervention alone.
Prashant Bhushan responded by suggesting that the secular Indian Succession Act, which applies to other communities in certain cases, could fill the gap. “The general law of inheritance already existing in the country can be made applicable,” he argued.
The bench, however, remained circumspect. “These are highly sensitive matters. We have to consider the larger legal framework and the social consequences for the community,” the judges remarked. They reiterated that law-making authority primarily rests with the legislature in such issues. “Personal laws often involve deep religious beliefs, and sweeping changes require careful legislative thought,” the court added.
Muslim community leaders and scholars have welcomed the court’s measured tone, viewing it as recognition of the religious significance of inheritance rules derived from Shariah laws. A prominent Muslim organisation representative said: “We respect the court’s wisdom in not rushing into this. Muslim women already have rights under Islamic law that protect their property and financial independence in ways not always available under other systems. Any change must come through dialogue within the community and not imposed from outside.”
Women’s rights activists supporting the petition, on the other hand, stressed the need for reform. One activist commented, “Equality before law cannot be selective. Muslim women deserve the same rights as others, and the court has shown in the past that it can protect fundamental rights even in personal matters.”
The hearing did not conclude with any interim order or final decision. The Supreme Court has kept the matter pending for further consideration, indicating that it will weigh all aspects—including constitutional provisions, religious freedom, and practical implications—before proceeding.
The case has once again brought the debate on Uniform Civil Code and personal law reforms into focus, with many in the Muslim community expressing hope that any discussion respects their faith while addressing genuine concerns of equality. The matter is likely to see more hearings in the coming weeks.
