The Indian law used to say that Mandatory probate was necessary Now the government is thinking of changing this rule with the new Repealing and Amending Bill, 2025. For a time the Indian Succession Act, 1925 had a rule that said someone who gets something from a Will or the person in charge of the Will could not go to court to get what they want unless they got something called probate or letters of administration first. This rule was stated in Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The Mandatory probate rule was very strict. Had to be followed. So basically even if someone’s Will is real and nobody is arguing about it the law says that people in cities like Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata have to go through a formal process called probate before they can get what they are supposed to get. This rule has been around since the days and it is not applied equally to everyone. For example Muslims do not have to follow this rule. Some State Governments can choose to exempt certain groups of people which means that how this rule is applied can depend on what religion you are and where you live. The law about the Will is affected by this. People in different places, like Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata have to deal with it. This has taken a time but it has caused a lot of problems with the way things are done. It has also increased the costs of going to court. Raised some serious questions about whether everyone is treated equally under the law. The Repealing and Amending Bill 2025 is trying to fix these problems. It wants to remove Section 213 which means that probate will not be required all the time. The bill is also trying to make some changes to Section 3 which used to give States the power to say that some communities did not have to follow Section 213. It wants to change Section 370 which did not allow succession certificates to be given in cases where probate was necessary. The Repealing and Amending Bill 2025 is trying to make these changes to solve the problems, with probate and Section 213. The law has changed because Section 213 is gone. This means that people do not need to do probate to get what they are supposed to get from a Will. This does not mean that probate is not available anymore. People can still choose to do probate if they want to be sure and safe. Probate is like a safety net that can protect people from problems that might come up later. If someone says that a Will is not real the court will look into it. People can still say that a Will is not fair if they think someone was tricked into signing it or if the person who made the Will was not able to make decisions. The courts will look at things like fraud. If someone was forced to sign the Will. Probate is still an idea for people who want to avoid problems with a Will. The reform therefore strikes a careful balance: it removes an outdated procedural compulsion while preserving judicial scrutiny where necessary. In effect, the law shifts from compulsory probate to optional probate, making succession law more accessible, constitutionally neutral, and efficient, while continuing to protect the sanctity of testamentary dispositions. A layperson can now understand that while probate remains valuable, it is no longer unavoidable, and the enforcement of a Will depends more on its authenticity than on procedural formality.

So, the change shifts things from rigid rules to real justice. Now, it’s about whether a Will is genuine not about jumping through hoops. Courts can still step in if someone tries to cheat, pressure, or mislead. But the whole system gets simpler, fairer, and more in line with constitutional values. Scrapping this colonial leftover means no more religion-based exceptions, less red tape, and better access to justice, all while keeping protections in place where they’re actually needed.