Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:48:06.360Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Muhammadan Law in India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2009

Asaf A. A. Fyzee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The history of Muhammadan Law in India falls naturally into three periods: (A) The period of Muslim domination (1206 A.D.–1857 A.D.); (B) The British period (1661–1951); (C) The Republican period (commencing with the promulgation of the Constitution of India on 26 January 1950). The dates are in such cases somewhat misleading and not mathematically “neat”. They may overlap, as in the British period, or, be ambient, as during the Muslim Sultanate. On the other hand they indicate with some degree of clarity the historical evolution and the time sequence of each system of jurisprudence. It will thus be seen that the Muhammadan law in India is one more instance of law being a function of society, thus being in a continuous state of flux. It is hardly necessary for me to add that the above classification must be read culliert to itc natural limitations.

Type
The Laws
Information
Comparative Studies in Society and History , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , July 1963 , pp. 401 - 415
Copyright
Copyright © Society for the Comparative Study of Society and History 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Ahmad, M. B., Administration of Justice in Medieval India (Aligarh, 1941) 25.Google Scholar

2 Morley, W. H., Administration of Justice in British India (London, 1858), 193; Fyzee, Outlines of Muhammadan Law, 2nd ed., 42.Google Scholar

3 Hamilton, , Hedaya, Preliminary Discourse, xiv.Google Scholar

4 Fyzee, op. cit., 42; Ahmad, 32.

5 Fyzee, op. cit., 37; Ahmad, 90–91 and other places.

6 Ahmad, 66.

7 Ibid., 67.

8 Ibid., 266 ff.

9 Ibid., 68.

10 Da‘ä’im, II, Para. 1394.

11 Fyzee, , Modern Approach to Islam (Asia Pub. House, 1963).Google Scholar

12 Da‘ā’im, II, Para. 1887.

13 Hamilton, Hedaya, 338a.

14 Cited and explained, Fyzee, Outlines, 300.

15 Hamilton, Hedaya, 334a.

16 Ahmad, 92.

17 Ibid., 93.

18 Ibid., 94.

19 Fyzee, op. cit., 42 sq.

20 Ahmad, 155.

21 Ibid., 155–56.

22 Ibid., 272–end.

23 Ibid., 202ff.

24 Setalvad, , The Common Law of India (London, 1960), 4.Google Scholar

25 Rankin, George Claus, Background to Indian Law (Cambridge, 1946), 1.Google Scholar

26 Morley, W. H., Digest, i, clxix.Google Scholar

27 Wilson, (5th ed., Calcutta, 1921), Anglo-Muhammadan Law, 31; Sir George Rankin, Background to Indian Law, 9; Robaba (incorrectly, Robasa) v. Khodadad (1946) 48 Bombay Law Reporter 864, 878; Fyzee, op. cit., 43.

28 Setalvad, , The Common Law in India, London, 1960, 12, citing Letters Patent of 09 24, 1726.Google Scholar

29 Rankin, op. cit., 119.

30 Fyzee, op. cit., 43.

31 Setalvad, op. cit., 10.