Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Smt. Gohar Sultan vs Sheikh Anis Ahmad on 25 February, 2026
Author: Sanjay Karol
Bench: Sanjay Karol
ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.11 SECTION XIV-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal No(s).2637/2012
SMT. GOHAR SULTAN APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
SHEIKH ANIS AHMAD & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)
[ PART HEARD BY:- HON'BLE SANJAY KAROL AND HON'BLE AUGUSTINE GEORGE
MASIH,JJ. ] [ HIGH UP ON THE BOARD ]
Date : 25-02-2026 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rakesh Khanna, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Irshad Ahmad, AOR
Mr. M. Khairati, Adv.
Mr. Junaid Ali Khan, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv.
Mr. H.m. Ghouse, Adv.
Ms. Arushi Jindal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :
M/S. Equity Lex Associates, AOR
Mrs. Naghma Imtiaz, Adv.
Mr. Zargham Ahmed, Adv.
Mr. Saif Naseem, Adv.
Ms. Saima Jawed, Adv.
Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, AOR
Mr. Rishi Yadav, Adv.
Ms. Ruchira Goel, AOR
Mr. Krishna Kant Dubey, Adv.
Mr. S.N. Terdal, AOR
Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, A.S.G.
Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR
Mr. Pramod Kumar Vishnoi, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Avnish Dave, Adv.
Digitally signed by
NAVEEN D
Date: 2026.02.26
18:13:48 IST
Reason:
Also, the particulars of the learned Standing Counsel, who have
1
appeared before on our asking are hereunder:
S.I. Name of the Name of the Standing E.Mail Address
No. State/U.T Counsel
1 Andhra Pradesh Mr. Guntur Pramod, [email protected]
AOR m
2. Arunachal Pradesh Ms. Eliza Barr, Adv. [email protected]
Mr. Disha Singh, AOR [email protected]
3. Assam Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, [email protected]
AOR om
4. Bihar Mr. Manish Kumar, manishkumar.advocate@gmail
AOR .com
5. Chhattisgarh Mr. Apoorv Shukla, Shukla.apporv@aureatechamb
Adv. ers.com
6. Goa Mr. Abhay Anturkar, anturkarandassociates@gmai
AOR l.com
7. Gujarat Ms.Swati Ghildiyal, adv.swati.ghildiyal@gmail.
AOR com
8. Haryana Mr. Samar Vijay [email protected]
Singh, AOR
9. Himachal Pradesh Mr. Varinder Kumar [email protected]
Sharma, AOR
10. Jharkhand Mr. Vishnu Sharma, [email protected]
AOR
11. Karnataka Mr. Naveen Sharma, naveensharma.advocate@gmai
AOR l.com
12. Kerala Mr. Harshad V. [email protected]
Hameed, AOR
13. Madhya Pradesh Mr. Harmeet Singh [email protected]
Ruprah, AOR
14. Maharashtra Mr. Shrirang Verma, mahastandingcounsel.servic
AOR [email protected]
15. Manipur Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh [email protected]
Kumar, AOR m
16. Meghalaya Mr. Abhikalp Pratap [email protected]
Singh, AOR
17. Mizoram Mr. Anando Mukherjee, anandomukherjee.law@gmail.
AOR com
18. Nagaland Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, [email protected]
AOR
19. Odisha Mr. Akshay [email protected]
Amritanshu, AOR
20. Punjab Ms. Nupur Kumar, AOR [email protected]
2
21. Rajasthan Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, AOR [email protected]
22. Sikkim Mr. Sameer Pradeep [email protected]
Abhyankar, Adv.
23. Tamil Nadu Mr. Sabarish [email protected]
Subramanian, AOR
24. Telangana Mr. Shravan Kumar, [email protected]
Adv.
[email protected]
Ms. Devina Sehgal,
AOR
25. Tripura Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, standingcounselofficetripu
AOR [email protected]
26. Uttar Pradesh Ms. Ruchira Goel, AOR [email protected]
Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, [email protected]
AOR
27. Uttarakhand Mr. Sudarshan Singh [email protected]
Rawat, AOR
28. West Bengal Mr. Kunal Mimani, AOR [email protected]
29. Andaman and Mr. S. N. Terdal, AOR [email protected]
Nicobar Islands
30. Chandigarh Mr. S. N. Terdal, AOR [email protected]
31. Dadra and Nagar Mr. S. N. Terdal, AOR [email protected]
Haveli and Daman
and Diu
32. Delhi (National Ms. Swati Ghildiya, adv.swati.ghildiyal@gmail.
Capital AOR com
Territory)
Mr. Bhakti Vardhan [email protected]
Singh, AOR
33. Jammu and Kashmir Mr. Parth Awasth, [email protected]
Adv. om
34. Ladakh Mr. S. N. Terdal, AOR [email protected]
35. Lakshadweep Mr. S. N. Terdal, AOR [email protected]
36. Puducherry Mr. Aravindh [email protected]
Selvaraj, Adv.
Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. It has been brought to our notice that the provisions of Section 4 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) 3 Application Act, 1937 (for short, ‘the Act, 1937’) have not been implemented by all States and Union Territories.
2. We clarify that we are not impleading the States or Union Territories as party respondents; however, we request the learned standing counsel appearing for all States and Union Territories to ascertain the facts and the position regarding the implementation of the Act, 1937 and supply the information to Ms.Archana Pathak Dave, learned Additional Solicitor General.
3. The learned Additional Solicitor General shall, after collecting and collating the same, file a report, comprehensive in nature, before this Court before the next date of listing.
4. Vide order dated 04.02.2026, we had impleaded the State of Uttar Pradesh through its Chief Secretary as a party respondent. At this stage, considering that the other states are not impleaded as party respondents, the said respondent is deleted from the array of parties. The Registry is directed to amend the cause title accordingly.
5. The Registry is further directed to serve a copy of this order to the learned standing counsel for all States and Union Territories to ensure prompt compliance.
6. List on 18.03.2026.
(D. NAVEEN) (ANU BHALLA)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
4