Chennai: A Muslim woman, mother of three children, whose husband had obtained an authoritative verdict / fatwa from the Government Chief Kazi, dissolving her marriage by way of showing a Kulanama (mutual agreement) alleged to have been written by her, failed to get reprieve as the Madras high court has declined to revoke the order of the Chief Kazi.
In her appeal, she alleged that her husband, a beef merchant, had subsequently married another Muslim woman and is living with her separately.
“The allegations made by the appellant are disputed questions of fact. It is well settled that the disputed questions of fact cannot be gone into by this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ court is concerned only with the questions of law, but not the questions of fact.
The disputed questions of facts have to be dealt with only by the appropriate forum or the court or the authority as the case may be and not by this court. Hence, in our considered view, the petition was not maintainable, as the appellant has to work out her remedy only before the appropriate forum or authority under the appropriate law”, said a division bench comprising Justices Huluvadi G Ramesh and S.Vaidyanathan while dismissing the appeal filed by the woman.
According to her, she got married to the beef merchant on August 20, 1987 as per Islamic customary rites and practice and the marriage was duly recorded in the Nikkah register of Padi Jumma Masjid. He did not have any regular income and took to drinking. He went to his native place at Velambur in Cheyyar Taluk to meet his parents but did not return to Chennai. Subsequently, she came to know that he had married another woman and living with her separately.
On enquiry, she also came to know that he had obtained an authoritative verdict / fatwa from Government Chief Kazi, dissolving the marriage with her by way of showing a Kulanama dated June 9, 2006 alleged to have been written by her. She had not opted to get divorce from him and that the letter alleged to have been signed by her was a forged one and so she filed a petition and a single judge dismissed it.
The bench said for the very allegations made by the appellant, criminal proceedings have already been initiated and the same were pending before the criminal court. The veracity or otherwise of the allegations can be gone into by the criminal court after following the due process of law. The fact also remains that the criminal proceedings and the claim with regard to the relief sought in the petition were independent of each other, the bench added and dismissed the appeal....