Karnataka HC Questions Waqf Board's Authority to Issue Marriage and Divorce Certificates, Adjourns Hearing

Karnataka HC Questions Waqf Board's Authority to Issue Marriage and Divorce Certificates, Adjourns Hearing

The Karnataka High Court raised concerns on Monday regarding the State Board of Waqf's authority to issue marriage and divorce certificates to Muslim couples. 

The Court had previously stayed a Government Order (GO) from August 30, 2023, which authorized the Waqf Board and its district officers to issue marriage certificates to Muslim couples.

Following a request, a bench led by Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice MI Arun granted the State more time to respond to the petition challenging the GO. The matter has been scheduled for a hearing on February 19.

During the proceedings, the Court questioned, “Is the Waqf authority also issuing marriage and divorce certificates? We won’t grant much time for a response, as this is a crucial issue. You seem to lack authority under the Waqf Act,” it remarked.

The petition was filed by Alam Pasha, who is seeking to quash the GO issued by the Under Secretary of the Minority, Waqf and Haj Department of the State government. The GO authorizes district Waqf boards across Karnataka to issue marriage certificates. 

The petitioner argued that previously, the Kazi (the person reciting Quranic verses during a marriage ceremony) was authorized by the Waqf Board under the Kazi Act of 1988 to issue marriage certificates. However, the Kazi Act was repealed in 2013, and the State issued the GO to authorize the Waqf Board to take over the issuance of marriage certificates. 

The petition further contends that the Waqf Act only addresses the management of movable and immovable properties, with no provisions allowing the Waqf Board to handle or issue marriage certificates.

In a hearing last November, the State government explained that the GO was issued to assist Muslims traveling abroad after marriage, as they were facing challenges in obtaining marriage certificates. However, during today's proceedings, the Court was informed that the arguing counsel was unavailable, leading to the adjournment of the matter.

Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy