The process by which the courts interpret and apply the law in a certain circumstance is known as interpretation. While adjudicating on a case, a certain amount of interpretation is required. When it comes to personal legislation, however, the judiciary's ability to interpret the law is limited. Muslim law is a type of personal law based on the Quran and Sunnat as its major sources. This legislation has been in effect for over a thousand years, and its adherents hold it in high regard. The fact that the Quran has remained unaltered to this day demonstrates this. The Supreme Court is unable to freely interpret it. The SC must accept the interpretation of well-known Muslim jurists when interpreting it, and they cannot provide their own view of Muslim law. However, depending on the sort of society and the age in which it is employed, each rule has a varied utility. As a result, the court develops laws and shapes them into effective weapons for advancing justice. This is done by the use of legal interpretation. So, what powers does the judiciary have when it comes to interpreting Muslim law? In what conditions is it permissible for the judges to interpret Muslim law in their own way? Using primary and secondary sources, we examine the conditions in which the judiciary can apply its power of interpretation over Muslim laws in this article.