Pranav B Prem

In a recent decision, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has clarified that Muslim men can seek dissolution of marriage under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984. This ruling resolves a legal ambiguity by affirming that the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, does not provide a remedy for Muslim men to seek divorce, but the Family Courts Act fills this gap.

The Division Bench of Justice Anand Pathak and Justice Hirdesh set aside a Family Court ruling that dismissed a Muslim man's petition for divorce on the grounds of adultery, deeming it non-maintainable under Muslim law. The High Court emphasized that Family Courts have the jurisdiction to entertain such suits under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, and Rule 9 of the Madhya Pradesh Family Court Rules, 1988.

Background of the Case

The appeal arose from a Family Court's order rejecting a divorce petition filed by the appellant, Mohammad Shah, against his wife, Chandani Begum. The couple, married in 2007, faced persistent domestic issues, with allegations of the wife living in adultery with another person. The appellant contended that the Family Court erred in holding the suit non-maintainable. The Family Court had reasoned that since the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, provides grounds for divorce only to Muslim women, Muslim men lacked a statutory mechanism for seeking judicial dissolution of marriage. This view was overturned by the High Court.

High Court Observations

The High Court extensively examined the jurisdictional framework provided by the Family Courts Act and the Madhya Pradesh Family Court Rules. Key observations included:

1. Jurisdiction under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984:
   Section 7 empowers Family Courts to hear suits or proceedings arising out of marital relationships, irrespective of caste or religion. This provision explicitly includes dissolution of marriage.

2. Applicability of Rule 9 of the 1988 Rules:
   Rule 9 allows Family Courts to register suits arising under Muslim personal laws, including the Shariat Act, 1937, and the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939.

3. The Court emphasized that no person can be left remediless under the law. It observed that denying Muslim men access to judicial remedies for marital disputes would contradict constitutional morality and the principle of justice.

The Bench also referred to the precedent set in Aqeel Ahmed (Khan) v. Smt. Farzana Khatun, wherein the maintainability of divorce suits filed by Muslim men under the Family Courts Act was upheld.

Key Excerpts from the Judgment

• “The procedure established by law is clear that a Muslim male can file a suit or proceeding for dissolution of marriage on the grounds available to him.”
• “If the reasoning of the trial court were accepted, a Muslim male would have been denied the valuable right to access justice... This could never have been the Constitutional spirit, morality, and vision of justice.”

Verdict

Setting aside the Family Court’s decision, the High Court remanded the matter for adjudication on merits, reiterating that Family Courts have the jurisdiction to hear cases of divorce filed by Muslim men.  The Court also directed that a copy of this judgment be circulated to all Civil and Family Courts through the Registrar General to ensure uniformity in legal interpretation.

Cause Title: Mohammad Shah Vs. Smt. Chandani Begum

Case No: First Appeal No. 1199 of 2022

Date: January-07-2025

Bench: Justice Anand Pathak and Justice Hirdesh

[Read/Download Order]