On July 24, 1926, Maulvi Ilahi Bux, a resident of the village Mahanad, in the Tahsil of Ahmadpur Sharqia, Bahawalpur State, filed a suit, on behalf of his daughter, Ghulam Aisha, against Abdur Razzaq Qadiani, in the lower Court of Ahmadpur Sharqia. In the case, it was alleged, by the plaintiff, that Abdur Razzaq to whom she was given in wedlock before her age of puberty, was no longer her lawful husband, since, in consequence of his conversion to Qadiani faith, he had become renegade from Islam and that apostasy, in accordance with the Law of Shariat, renders a wedlock null and void.
The defendant stated in reply that the Qadianis are only a sect of Islam and that, on the basis of their article of faith, they can not be declared infidel (Kafir) or apostate (Murtad). Hence, there is no ground for dissolution of marriage.
This case, having passed through several stages, came up for hearing before Munshi Muhammad Akbar Khan, B.A., LL.B., District Judge, Bahawalnagar. The learned Judge, after several years of full discussion, in which renowned scholars of both the party took part, gave his verdict on February 7, 1935. The verdict reads as follows:
On behalf of the plaintiff, it has been proved that Mirza Sahib (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian) is a false claimant of prophethood and hence the defendant who accepts Mirza Sahib as Prophet shall also be deemed an apostate. Therefore, the preliminary issues framed by the Munsif of Ahmadpur Sharqia on November 4, 1926 having been established in favor of the plaintiff, it is hereby declared that the defendant by reason of his conversion to the Qadiani faith has become an apostate and therefore his marriage stands dissolved since the date of his apostasy.
Even if the articles of the defendant’s faith are considered in the light of the concluded discussions, the plaintiff has successfully established vis-a-vis the allegation of the defendant, that there shall not arise an ‘ummati’ prophet after Muhammad(peace be upon him). Besides this, the other articles of faith, which the defendant has ascribed to himself may correspond to the general view of the principles in Islamic faith, he shall be deemed to act on them in the sense and import which Mirza Sahib has put upon them. And because this is in conflict with the one which the Muslim Ummah, as a whole, has attributed to them (articles of faith), he can not therefore be called a Muslim. And, in both the cases he is an apostate. And apostate’s marriage stands resolved by the reason of his apostasy. It is, therefore, decreed in favor of the plaintiff that the plaintiff ceased to be the wife of the defendant from the date of the defendant’s apostasy and that she will be entitled to the costs incurred in the case.