Patna HC rules Muslim man need not give reason for divorce

Patna: The Patna High Court on August 31 held that a Muslim husband is not required to establish a specific ground for dissolving a marriage through talaq under Muslim personal law. However, the court dismissed an appeal by Md Sarif Anwar and upheld the Family Court’s refusal to issue him a divorce decree.

A division bench of Justices Bibek Chaudhuri and Rana Vikram Singh was hearing Anwar’s appeal against his wife, Noorjahan Khatoon, Siasat Daily reported.

Anwar had alleged that Noorjahan subjected him to cruelty after their marriage on April 7, 1999, and left the matrimonial home permanently on October 14, 2008. He claimed that he made several attempts to bring her back, but she refused, indicating that she wanted to end the marriage.

According to Anwar, he subsequently pronounced talaq and approached the Family Court seeking a formal divorce decree. Noorjahan did not appear before the Family Court despite being served summons, following which the proceedings continued in her absence.

Both Anwar and Noorjahan subsequently entered into second marriages, with Noorjahan currently residing in Bengaluru.

The Family Court had rejected Anwar’s plea after referring to the Supreme Court’s 2017 judgment that declared triple talaq unconstitutional. It concluded that Anwar had not legally dissolved his marriage through the pronouncements he relied upon.

Challenging the decision before the High Court, Anwar argued that Noorjahan had deserted him in 2008 and that he had approached the court in 2021, more than 13 years later.

The High Court, while examining Mulla’s Principles of Mahomedan Law, observed that a Muslim marriage could be dissolved by the husband at his will, by mutual consent or through a decree of a court. It held that a Muslim husband seeking to dissolve a marriage through talaq was not required to establish a specific ground for divorce.

The bench also noted that talaq could be pronounced either orally or through a written Talaknama.

The court examined the recognised forms of talaq, including Talaq Ahsan, Talaq Hasan and Talaq-ul-Bidaat, also known as Talaq-i-Badai. It noted that the Supreme Court had declared Talaq-i-Bidaat, involving three successive pronouncements of talaq, unconstitutional.

The High Court pointed out that Anwar had not claimed to have divorced Noorjahan through either Talaq Ahsan or Talaq Hasan and that his case was based on successive pronouncements of talaq.

The bench explained that Talaq Ahsan becomes final and irrevocable after the completion of the Iddat period, while Talaq Hasan becomes irrevocable after the third pronouncement. On that basis, it held that a divorce declared through successive pronouncements of talaq could not be treated as irrevocable.

The court also rejected Anwar’s reliance on allegations of cruelty and desertion, observing that his counsel’s contention that the marriage could be dissolved through a court decree on those grounds was legally misconceived in the circumstances of the case.

Finding no illegality in the Family Court’s order, the High Court dismissed Anwar’s appeal.