Ahmedabad: In a strongly-worded order, the Gujarat High Court has said the Quran, which Muslims believe to be a revelation from God, was being misinterpreted by Muslim men to have more than one wife.
The High Court also observed that the provision of polygamy was being misused by men for 'selfish reasons'.
Justice JB Pardiwala made this observation yesterday while pronouncing the order related to Section 494 of IPC, which deals with punishment for having more than one wife.
Petitioner, Jafar Abbas Merchant, had approached the court to quash an FIR against him filed by his wife who alleged that he got married to another woman without her consent.
Also Read: Talaq delivered through Skype, WhatsApp and others means valid
In the FIR, she invoked section 494 of IPC (marrying again during lifetime of husband or wife) against her husband.
In his plea, Jafar, however, claimed that the Muslim Personal Law allows Muslim men to marry four times and hence the FIR against him does not stand legal scrutiny.
In the order, Justice Pardiwala noted "the Quran is being misinterpreted by Muslim men to have more than one wife."
"When the Quran allowed polygamy, it was for a fair reason. When men use that provision today, they do it for a selfish reason. Polygamy finds mention in the Quran only once, and it is about conditional polygamy," the court's order said.
"Muslim Personal Law does not permit a Muslim to treat one wife cruelly, drive her out of the matrimonial home and then get married for the second time. However, there is no law in this country which takes care of this situation. There is no uniform civil code in this country," the order further said.
The court also noted that time has come for the country to embrace the uniform civil code as such provisions are in violation of the Constitution.
"On the basis of modern, progressive thinking, India must shun the practice and establish uniform civil code," the court said.
In the past few weeks, the debate on Uniform Civil Code has revived in the country with several Muslims opposing its introduction by terming it 'absolutely incorrect'.
