The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that a private religious body calling itself an “Idara-E-Shariya Islami Court” has no legal authority to decide the marital status or legal rights of an individual.
Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, in a judgment delivered on September 7, 2026, held that the communication issued by the body declaring the petitioner divorced could not operate as a legal decree or alter her marital status. The Court, however, left open the larger constitutional question concerning the validity of Talaq-e-Hasan.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, whose name is masked in the judgment, had approached the High Court challenging an order dated January 18, 2022, issued by Respondent No. 9, the Idara-E-Shariya Islami Court.
The dispute followed marital discord between the petitioner and Respondent No. 10. According to the judgment, Respondent No. 10 had communicated Talaq-e-Hasan in three stages on August 31, September 30 and October 30, 2021. The petitioner had also complained about alleged harassment and cruelty, following which FIR No. 118/2021 was registered at Mahila Thana, Raipur, under Sections 498-A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Idara-E-Shariya subsequently issued its January 18, 2022 communication stating that the petitioner had been divorced. She challenged both the communication and the authority claimed by the institution.
Court’s Observation
The High Court relied substantially on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Vishwa Lochan Madan v. Union of India, which held that bodies such as Dar-ul-Qaza are not courts established by law and that their opinions or fatwas do not have binding legal force.
The Court made the position clear:
“Respondent No.9 cannot be recognised as a Court constituted under the Constitution or any statute. It has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the marital status of the petitioner or to pass an order which, in law, determines whether the petitioner stands divorced from Respondent No.10.”
The Court distinguished between a religious opinion and a legally enforceable judicial decision. It held that the January 18 communication was, at best, a communication or religious opinion from a private body and could not create, extinguish or alter any legally enforceable right or status.
Talaq-e-Hasan Question Left Open
The High Court specifically declined to decide whether Talaq-e-Hasan itself is constitutionally valid. It noted that related constitutional questions are pending before the Supreme Court and therefore left those issues for the competent court.
The Court also clarified that the pending criminal proceedings arising from FIR No. 118/2021 would continue independently and would not be affected by the judgment.
Decision
The High Court partly allowed the writ petition. It declared the January 18, 2022 communication of Respondent No. 9, to the extent that it purported to determine or declare the petitioner’s marital status, to be without legal authority.
The Court further held that the institution could not function as a court established under the Constitution or any law, and that its decisions could not be enforced through coercive legal process or treated as binding adjudications of matrimonial rights.
The question of the constitutional validity of Talaq-e-Hasan was expressly left open. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
