Mallika Dureja
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court has issued a notice to the Attorney General (AG) of India regarding a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by the Hindu Personal Law Board seeking declaration of section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as unconstitutional as it discriminates on the basis of religion, according to the petitioner.
According to IPC section 494, if a person remarries during the lifespan of his or her first spouse without obtaining a divorce, the marriage is null and void. This offence is punishable by seven years in prison and a fine. This law applies to Hindus, Sikhs, and Christians, but not to Muslims, who may marry four times under the Muslim Personal Law (Shariah Application) Act of 1937.
Justices Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Sabyash Vidyarthi ruled on the PIL lodged by Pawan Kumar Das Shastri, the general secretary of the Hindu Personal Law Board, on February 27 of last year.
“Since the validity of the Muslim Personal (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, is being challenged in this PIL, and a declaration has been sought from this court declaring section 494 of the Indian Penal Code to be ultra vires, let notices be issued to the Attorney General,” the court ruled.
The court granted the Attorney General six weeks to submit a response. The court also ordered the Hindu Personal law Board to submit its response within two weeks of the Attorney General’s response. The court scheduled the next hearing for eight weeks from now.
Attorney Ashok Pandey, who represented the petitioner in court, stated, “Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code discriminates based on religion. Therefore, it ought to be discarded.” “The Hindu Personal Law Board is a registered trust under the Indian Trust Act created to protect and promote Hindu Personal Laws,” explained Pandey.
The Central government was represented by advocate SB Pandey, the deputy solicitor general of India, assisted by advocate Anand Dwivedi.
“The country does not apply the common civil code. Numerous religious groups have polygamist progenitors and deities. “However, they have been prohibited by law from practising polygamy, despite the fact that it was part of their personal law,” stated the petitioner.
