UNEQUAL TREATMENT OF WIVES A VALID GROUND FOR DIVORCE FOR MUSLIM WOMEN: KERALA HIGH COURT

UNEQUAL TREATMENT OF WIVES A VALID GROUND FOR DIVORCE FOR MUSLIM WOMEN: KERALA HIGH COURT

The refusal to cohabit and perform the marital obligations with the previous wife is tantamount to the violation of the Quranic injunctions which commands equal treatment of the wives if the husband contracts more than one marriage. In such circumstances, we have no hesitation to hold that the appellant-wife is entitled to get a decree of divorce on that ground also.”

The Kerala High Court has as of late decided that the refusal of a Muslim man to play out his conjugal commitments with his first spouse following a subsequent marriage is a decent ground for separate.
A Division Bench of Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas in its request noticed:

The Court further noted,

“If there exists a marriage with another lady during the subsistence of the previous marriage, the burden is on the husband to prove that he had treated both wives equitably in accordance with the injunctions of Quran.


The Bench was mediating upon an allure documented by a Muslim lady wronged by a request for a Family Court which prevented her a declaration from getting divorce. She wedded the respondent in this in 1991 and had three youngsters with him in wedlock. During his time abroad, the respondent gotten a marriage with one more woman during the resource of their marriage.n her appeal for separate, the grounds under Section 2 (ii), 2(iv) and 2(viii) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 were alluded to. During the pleadings, Section 2(viii) (f) was likewise alluded to. The Court noticed that according to Section 2 (ii), the spouse is qualified for a separation assuming the husband has dismissed or neglected to accommodate her upkeep for a time of two years. Notwithstanding, upon examination of records, plainly the spouse used to give support to the appealing party while he was abroad, and subsequently concurred with the Trial Court’s finding on this ground.
Coming to the following ground, Section 2(iv) states that she is qualified for a separation assuming the spouse has neglected to perform, without sensible reason, his conjugal commitments for a time of three years. The litigant had expressed in the appeal that from 21.02.2014 onwards, the respondent-spouse quit visiting her and this reality was not denied in the composed assertion. Then again, as indicated by the respondent, he had to wed one more woman for the explanation that the litigant neglected to co-work with him on his actual necessities. “We are not convinced to accept the variant of the respondent in such manner. Three kids were brought into the world in wedlock. Two of them got hitched. Totally, there was no proof to show that the respondent was able to live together with the appealing party. That implies, he neglected to play out the conjugal commitments. The request for separate was documented in the year 2019. They were living independently essentially for a time of five years before recording this appeal. In such conditions, we are of the view that the litigant made out a ground for separate under Section 2(iv) of the Act.” The Court noticed that the Family Court carried on a supposition that giving support would be adequate to demonstrate that the spouse performed conjugal commitments. This viewing was found as incorrect by the Bench and that it doesn’t stand the examination of the law.

At last, Section 2(viii) (a) and (f) states as follows: “that the spouse treats her with brutality, in other words (a) routinely attacks her or makes her life hopeless by savagery of lead regardless of whether such direct sum to actual sick therapy, or (f) assuming he has a larger number of wives than one, doesn’t treat her impartially as per the orders of the Qoran.” Since there was no living together over the most recent 5 years, the Court observed that the instance of physical or mental cold-bloodedness couldn’t be legitimized with regards to the Act. In any case, the respondent had not denied the averments with respect to contracting second marriage. Avoiding the principal spouse for a very long time itself would show that he had not treated them similarly. The respondent has no case that he lived with the appealing party later 2014. Noticing that refusal to live together and play out the conjugal commitments with the past spouse is commensurate to the infringement of the Quranic directives, the Court tracked down this a fit case for a separation to be conceded. The allure was in this manner permitted and the preliminary court choice as saved. The appealing party was addressed by Advocates C. Ijlal and Ummul Fida while the respondent was addressed by Advocates T.P. Sajid and Shifa Latheef.

LANDMARK CASE:- Ramla v. Abdul Rahuf

Aishwarya Says:

I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.

If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.

Do follow me on FacebookTwitter  Youtube and Instagram.

The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.

If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at secondinnings.hr@gmail.com

In the year 2021, we wrote about 1000 Inspirational Women In India, in the year 2022, we would be featuring 5000 Start Up Stories.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.