As to the Sharay-ul-Islam Mr. Baillie in his Vol. II, page 26 has said that it is a-work of the highest authority. Mr. Shama Charan Sircar has called it a work of the highest authority, at least in India, and more universally referred to than any other Shiah Law book, and the chief authority for the law of the Shiahs in India.

Mr. Ameer Ali in his introduction to Vol. I at page 31 has pointed out that the Sharaya-ul-Islam is a well-known work on the Shiah Law on which several commentaries are in existence.

The author of the book was ‘Al Muhakkiq’.

Mr. Ameer Ali has himself in his book largely relied on Sharaya-ul-Islam. In the case of Agha Ah Khan v. Altaf Hasan Khan 14 C. 276 : 11 Ind. Jur. 296 : 7 Ind. Dec. (N.s.) 183, Mahrnood, J., in delivering the judgment of the Full Bench, remarked at page 450 14 A he Sharaya-ul-Islam is the most authoritative text-book of the Shiah Law.”

In the case of Mahomed Abid Ali Kumar Kadar v. Ludden Sahib a 14 C. 276 : 11 Ind. Jur. 296 : 7 Ind. Dec. (N.s.) 183. the learned Judges of the Calcutta High Court, at page 286 14 C. not prepared to doubt the correctness of the Sharaya-ul-Islam as a binding authority amongst the Shiahs in India

In the case of Nazar Husain v. Rafeeq Husain 18 Ind. Cas. 730 : 8 A.L.J. 1151 at p. 1153, Piggutt, J., remarked that the impression which he gathered from the Full Bench case of Agha Ali Khan v. Altaf Hasan Khan 14 C. 276 : 11 Ind. Jur. 296 : 7 Ind. Dec. (N.s.) 183. was that “the Sharaya-ul-Islam is the leading and the weightiest authority for the law applicable to the Shiah sect in India.”

In Aziz bano v. Mohammad Ibrahim Hussain (1925), the court affirmed the authority of this book and said, “Sharaya-ul Islam is undoubtedly the most universally known authority on Shiah Law so far at least as India is concerned.”

Tudball and Rafique, JJ., in the case of Khursheed Hussain v. Faiyaz Hussain 23 Ind. Cas. 253 : 36 A. 289 at p. 307 : 12 A.L.J. 417 had before them 19 authorities including Sharahi Luma and Jawahar-ul-Kalam on the one hand and yet they did not consider them to be of sufficient weight as against Sharaya-ul-Islam.

That danger is equally great whether reliance be placed upon fresh texts newly brought to light or upon fresh logical inferences newly drawn from old and undisputed texts. It is, therefore, dangerous to depart from the view of the law which has. remained unchallenged for at least over half a century and which is to be found in the Sharaya-ul-Islam, the book of the highest authority; in India, merely because some other authors have taken a contrary view.


Aziz bano v. Mohammad Ibrahim Hussain 1925, 89 Ind Cas 690