Husband’s Consent Not Needed For Khula: HC

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has ruled that a Muslim wife’s right to seek Khula — a form of divorce under Muslim personal law — is absolute and does not require either a specific cause or acceptance by the husband. The Court held that once the wife makes a valid demand for Khula, the only role of the judiciary is to place a legal stamp on the dissolution, thereby making it binding on both parties.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice B.R. Madhusudhan Rao delivered the judgment while hearing a husband’s appeal against a Family Court order. The Family Court had upheld the dissolution of the marriage as decided by the Sada-e-Haq Sharai Council in favour of the wife.

The court laid out a clear legal framework on Khula, emphasising that it is a recognised mode of dissolution where the wife expresses her unwillingness to continue the marital relationship. She may opt to settle the matter privately by consulting a Mufti of her Islamic School, who issues an advisory opinion (Fatwa) based on Shariat. If the private resolution fails, the matter may be litigated, in which case a Qazi delivers a judicial ruling (Qaza).

In its order, the court larified that a wife’s proposal for Khula takes immediate effect if it remains within the private, non-adjudicatory domain. The husband, it held, has no authority to deny the Khula request but may negotiate the return of Mehr (dower) or part of it. However, the wife is not obligated to offer any consideration in exchange for Khula, including relinquishing her claim to Mehr.

Importantly, the Bench ruled that obtaining a Khulanama (certificate of divorce) from a Mufti is not mandatory for the legal finality of the dissolution. The mufti’s opinion is advisory and does not carry binding legal force.

The court also advised Family Courts to restrict their role to a summary enquiry — verifying whether a valid Khula demand was made and whether reconciliation was attempted or an offer of Mehr return was considered. The inquiry, it emphasised, should not involve prolonged evidence or litigation.

While Khula is fundamentally a private and non-confrontational form of divorce, the wife has the option of approaching a Qazi for a Khulanama if the husband refuses to acknowledge the divorce. Conversely, a husband may approach the Family Court if he disputes the Khula or its legal effect. The Family Court thus serves as the only legal forum for both parties to assert their positions on marital status. The Court concluded that the requirements laid down by Family Courts merely restate the essential conditions for a Khula divorce to attain legal finality.