The Telangana High Court has held that a Muslim woman has the absolute right to dissolve her marriage through khula—a form of divorce initiated by the wife—without requiring the husband's consent.
The judgment was delivered by a division bench comprising Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice BR Madhusudhan Rao in the case of Mohammed Arif Ali v. Smt Afsarunnisa & Another.
The Court ruled that a Muslim wife’s decision to seek khula does not need to be preceded by any cause or dependent on the husband's acceptance, affirming that the husband's consent is not a precondition for a valid dissolution of marriage through this method.
"The Quran in Verses 228 and 229 in Chapter II confers absolute right on the wife to annul the marriage with her husband," the Bench observed, adding that Islamic texts do not prescribe any procedure in the event the husband rejects the wife's demand for khula.
The Bench clarified that obtaining a khulanama (certificate of divorce) from a Mufti or Dar-ul-Qaza is not mandatory to validate the dissolution. Such a certificate, the Court noted, has no legal sanctity and the opinion of a religious functionary is advisory at best.
"The only role of a Court of law is to put a judicial stamp on the termination of the marriage... The Family Court is simply to ascertain whether the demand for Khula is valid after an effective attempt to reconcile the differences," the Court stated, adding that such proceedings must be summary in nature and not involve extensive evidentiary hearings.
The Court emphasized that once a Muslim wife makes a demand for khula, the marriage stands effectively dissolved in the private sphere unless contested legally. The role of the Court is limited to confirming the legality of the divorce and facilitating procedural fairness.
In its words:
"Khula is a non-confrontational form of divorce and one which is privately settled after the parties have made an attempt to preserve the marriage... The husband does not have the right to refuse Khula merely because the wife declines to return the dower."
The ruling came in response to an appeal filed by a Muslim man challenging a Family Court’s decision that rejected his plea against a divorce certificate issued by Sada-E-Haq Sharai Council, a non-governmental organisation that facilitates resolution of marital disputes. His wife had approached the Council after he refused to grant consent for khula.
The High Court reviewed Quranic verses, Islamic jurisprudence, and prior judicial precedents before affirming that khula is a no-fault divorce and that any refusal by the husband is immaterial to its validity.
The Court found that the wife had demanded khula on multiple occasions and that reconciliation attempts had failed. Therefore, the issuance of the khulanama was valid, and the husband’s prayer against it was without basis.
"The appellant has failed to make out a case for interference in the impugned order, save and except to the extent that a Mufti/Religious Functionary does not have the authority to certify a Khula divorce," the Bench clarified.
While the Court restricted its findings to the facts of the case, it acknowledged concerns about the broader impact of delayed recognition of khula:
"We are confident that the law pronounced by the Courts shall be given due weightage by all the stakeholders in easing the plight of Muslim women in their respective situations."
Senior Counsel J Prabhakar and advocate Mohd Shafiuddin appeared for the appellant-husband. Advocates Mubashir Hussain Ansari and Imtiaz Gulam Mahboob Faiz represented the respondent-wife.
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy