33.1 C
Delhi
Tuesday, April 28, 2026

Karnataka HC questions Waqf Board’s authority on marriage, divorce certificates

Date:

Share post:

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court on Monday raised doubts over the authority of the State Board of Waqf to issue marriage and divorce certificates to Muslim couples, questioning whether such powers were vested under the Waqf Act.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice MI Arun, while hearing a petition challenging a government order (GO) authorising the Waqf Board to issue marriage certificates, observed that the Board appeared to have no statutory authority for such actions.

“The Waqf (Board) is granting marriage and divorce certificates also? We will not grant much time for a reply, as this is a very important matter. You apparently have no authority under the Waqf Act,” the Bench remarked.

The High Court had, in November last year, stayed the GO dated August 30, 2023, issued by the Under Secretary of the Minority, Waqf, and Haj Department. The order had permitted district Waqf Boards across Karnataka to issue marriage certificates, a move that was later challenged through a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by one Alam Pasha.

The petitioner contended that earlier, Kazis, who solemnise Muslim marriages, were authorised under the Kazi Act, 1988, to issue marriage certificates. However, the Act was repealed in 2013, and subsequently, the state government issued the GO permitting the Waqf Board to handle such certifications.

The PIL argued that the Waqf Act, 1995, primarily deals with the management of movable and immovable properties related to Waqf institutions and does not contain any provision allowing the Board to issue marriage or divorce certificates.

During a previous hearing in November 2024, the government had submitted that the GO was necessitated due to difficulties faced by Muslim couples travelling abroad in obtaining marriage certificates. However, the High Court had stayed the order, pending further deliberation.

On Monday, the Bench was informed that the state’s arguing counsel was unavailable, prompting the adjournment of the case. The matter has now been listed for hearing on February 19.

Related articles

SITI Odisha: From Planning to Transformation

When institutions change, the direction of a state often changes with them. Odisha’s decision to replace its legacy...

Regulating Foreign Funds: A Necessary Tightrope Walk

The proposed Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, reflects the Indian government’s continuing effort to tighten oversight of...

“The most powerful nation is the one that never abandons its soldiers.”

The story from that cold evening in 1997, when Bill Clinton stopped his motorcade to sit beside a...

Past Lessons, Future Risks: The Iran Ceasefire and the Shifting Balance of Power

The two week US-Iran ceasefire expires on 22 Apr. It was more of a tactical pause than a...