Did Supreme Court Pass Ruling Calling Interfaith Marriages 'Invalid'? No, Viral Claim Is Misleading

A cutout of a newspaper article is going viral across social media with the claim that the Supreme Court has declared that marriage between Muslim men and Hindu women will be considered legally invalid. Purported paperclip says that Supreme Court has issued a blanket judgement condemning Hindu-Muslim marriages.

Claim:

The image shows a snapshot of a newspaper article written in Hindi in which the headline reads, 'Marriage of Hindu Woman and Muslim Man is Invalid: Supreme Court.'

The text at the top of the image reads, "Supreme Court has declared that a marriage between Hindu women and Muslim men is invalid. All Hindu women should read this carefully. It is your responsibility to share this with everyone."

Text splashed across the image reads, "The Hindu community will be eternally grateful to the Supreme Court" and "Please forward this image everywhere."

Image Credit: Facebook

It is being viral on Facebook and Twitter with a similar claim.

Image Credit: Facebook

Fact Check:

We conducted a keyword search with the headline in Hindi and found an article published in Amar Ujala on 23 January 2019. The translated headline of the article read, 'Marriage of Hindu woman and Muslim man is irregular, illegal: Supreme Court.'

Image Credit: Amar Ujala

The article referred to a ruling by the Supreme Court which had noted that the marriage of a Hindu woman and a Muslim man is neither "regular nor valid". The report states that however, the child born out of this marriage is legal and the child is entitled to a share in his father's property.

The SC had declared that the woman is entitled to an allowance in such a marriage, but she will not be provided with any share in her husband's property. The court gave this order during the hearing of a property dispute.

The Amar Ujala report noted that the bench of Justices NV Raman and MM Shantanagoudar upheld a ruling by the Kerala High Court that a son of person named Mohammed Ilias and Valliamma, a formerly Hindu woman before marriage, was legitimate and entitled to a share in his father's property.

Image Credit: Amar Ujala

We conducted a keyword search taking a cue from the Amar Ujala report, which threw up a report by The Print published on January 22, 2019, titled, 'Marriage of Muslim man & Hindu woman irregular, but child is legitimate: SC'

The Print report provided further details on the SC's ruling which underlined that the marriage of a Muslim man with a Hindu woman was irregular. However, a child born from such a marriage would be entitled to claim a share in the father's property.

The article describes a case of a woman named Valliamma who was Hindu at the time of her marriage to Mohammed Ilias, a Muslim man. The petitioner in the case was Shamsudeen, the child born to the couple.

The report quotes a ruling by Justices N.V. Ramana and MM. Shantanagoudar who ruled that marriage of a Muslim man with an idolater or fire­worshipper is neither a valid nor a void marriage, but is merely an irregular marriage.

The report quotes a ruling by the SC, "It would not be out of place to emphasise at this juncture that since Hindus are idol worshippers, which includes worship of physical images/statues through offering of flowers, adornment, etc., it is clear that the marriage of a Hindu female with a Muslim male is not a regular or valid (sahih) marriage, but merely an irregular (fasid) marriage."

We also came across a Times of India article published on January 22, 2019, titled, 'Marriage of Hindu woman and Muslim man irregular'. The top court said that as Hindus are idol worshippers, the marriage of a Hindu woman with a Muslim man is merely an irregular one.

Image Credit: The Times Of India

We came across the entire text of the SC ruling on the legal repository website Indian Kanoon.

The case pertained to a dispute due to Shamsudeen's paternal cousins who challenged his claim to ancestral inheritance. These appellants cited the marriage between his mother (Valliamma) and his father (Mohammed Ilias) as invalid on religious grounds.

The ruling referred to the Kerala High Court's ruling, which had in turn based its decision after referring to various Islamic texts such as Mulla's Principles of Mahommedan Law and Syed Ameer Ali's Principles of Mahomedan Law. The Kerela HC had decided that Muslim law did not consider the marriage void. As per the Muslim law that the HC had referred to, children born in such a marriage were legitimate even if the marriage between a Muslim man and a "fire worshipper" or "idolatress" was considered "irregular". The SC had decided that such as marriage was not void or invalid, as per Muslim law.

Image Credit: Indian Kanoon

We also referred to the Special Marriage Act, of 1954 and found that it does not prohibit interfaith marriage provided some conditions such as both being over the age of 18 years, both being of sound mind without a mental disorder that restricts their ability to provide consent and provided there isn't an existing living spouse.

Image Credit: India Code

Conclusion:

We found that the claim that the Supreme Court has issued a blanket prohibition of all interfaith marriages between Hindu and Muslim communities is false. The case pertained to a dispute between a son of a Muslim man and a Hindu woman and his paternal cousins. In reply, the Supreme Court had noted exclusively in the matter of the case that the marriage between these communities is irregular but not void. Thus, we can conclude that the viral claim is misleading.

If you have any news that you believe needs to be fact-checked, please email us at factcheck@thelogicalindian.com or WhatsApp at 6364000343.

Also Read: No, These Images Are Not From Recent LAC Clash In Arunachal Pradesh; Visuals Shared With Misleading Claims