Another controversy has arisen and as usual everyone is up in arms against it. Please read that article before continuing here.
I am not getting into the details of the case but I would like to question the Islam obsessed media; The father-in-law has all along denied the rape claim and the issue was dismissed within the family but some neighbors got wind of it and soon a small-time local journalist called Shakti of the Hindi paper Dainik Jagaran got wind of it. Shakti came to the family and demanded ten thousand rupees to keep silent. The poor family pleaded that it did not have this kind of money citing local witnesses. The journalist went ahead and published the story in his newspaper. Zee TV picked it from Dainik Jagaran and thereafter all the channels, newspapers, agencies, NGOs and government organizations descended on the small village of Charthawal whose inhabitants would tremble even at the sight of a single baton-wielding policeman.
As in many rural areas in the Subcontinent, a local elders council (panchayat) was called in the village June 15 to deliberate over the issue. A local maulavi (scholar) told the panchayat that after the incident the woman was haram (forbidden) for her husband as she is like his “mother” now and that she should marry the rapist. The panchayat was described by the media as a “Shariat Panchayat” as if a meeting of Islamic scholars had taken the decision, which is not true.
Imrana case, because of its uniqueness, stumped even the Deoband.
A Noida-based Urdu newspaper, Rashtriya Sahara, asked the mufti in India’s premier Muslim seminary, Darul Uloom Deoband, to give his opinion.
The mufti, Maulana Habibur Rahman, without ascertaining the facts of the case or going to the area or sending someone there to find out the truth, issued a fatwa on June 25, saying Imrana “is now haram (forbidden) for her husband and should leave him”.
“We have obtained a copy of this fatwa and asked Mufti Habibur Rahman certain questions. He was unable to counter our argument that the Qur’anic injunction (“And marry not women whom your fathers married…” 4:22) does not apply here,” says this correspondent.
“The mufti gave us some references to support his view but when we read them, they did not seem to support the mufti’s interpretation which is the opinion of some Hanafi fuqaha (scholars) who consider rape also as a cause for prohibiting such marriages.
“We confronted the mufti again. This time he referred us to another maulana who, he said, was present in the meeting when the decision was taken. We asked him, why should we go to someone else when he (Mufti Habibur Rahman) had signed the fatwa. Seemingly he was not pleased with our argument and asked us to write down whatever “problems” we had in mind. We did this promptly and are still waiting for his reply.”
Other schools of thought like Shafi`i, Maliki, Jaafari Shia and Ahl-e Hadees reject this interpretation, as they hold that only legitimate marriage is meant in the Qur’anic injunction and a crime does not change the rule.
Just one day after our interaction June 29, the mufti’s office announced Friday, July 1, that the previous fatwa was not about Imrana, which is factually incorrect. While the name “Imrana” is not mentioned in the question to which the fatwa was given, her village and district are mentioned. Moreover, the July 3 issue of Rashtriya Sahara Urdu newspaper carries an article by Mufti Habibur Rahman which explicitly mentions the name of Imrana and pronounces the same opinion he earlier expressed in his fatwa.
I have always argued against the inept scholars of Islam which the madarsas produce. In fact its really disappointing to see the condition of Imams and Muazzin in mosques. They usually come from a poor background and in most cases sent to Madarsa just because they are considered incapable for worldly activities. And its appalling that over the years that this group has become the religious guide of Muslims. This has lead to many conflicts in the past because the interpretation of Sharia laws were never safe in their hands. Its ironic that women foreigners are admitted inside Jama masjid, Delhi just for appreciating the architectural beauty of it and on the other hand mosques across the country are so hostile towards the entry of women for prayers. The point i am trying to make is that the educated class of India should get involved in Imaamat. People who should have been leaders are not being led by fanatics like Imam Bukhari. Don’t misunderstand me, i am not putting the entire blame on our ulemas; many of them have done a great job and the nooraniat that few families possess has no comparison. Just that the absence of educated class irks me. We need to encourage our children to take up this profession along with worldly education, as was the case with Ulemas during the peak of Islam in the Arab world.
So chances are high that the same Islam obsessed media might have concocted stories in the present rape case in Murshidabad. The issue is all about ignorance about Islam. Then there is a common misconception that a rape victim has to produce 3 witnesses to prove the rape!! I wonder on the inanity of this argument. Were those witnesses voyeuring while the rape was taking place?
Sheikh Ahmad Kutty, a senior lecturer and Islamic scholar at the Islamic Institute of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, states:
If a person makes an allegation of adultery against another person (male or female) he or she must produce four witnesses to support such an allegation; otherwise, he or she is guilty of slandering, which is a grave offense in Islam, for we are not to tarnish the honor of anyone.
A woman who has been raped cannot be asked to produce witnesses; her claim shall be accepted unless there are tangible grounds to prove otherwise. To insist that she provide witnesses is akin to inflicting further pain on her. If anyone refutes her claim of innocence, the onus is on him to provide evidence, and she may simply deny the claim by making a solemn oath, thus clearing herself in public. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “The onus to provide evidence falls on the one who makes a claim, and the one who denies (the same) can absolve himself or herself by making a solemn oath to the contrary.�
With excerpts from IOL
More on Rape laws in IslamÂ
