Recently, the Himachal Pradesh High Court heard a petition seeking the quashing of the FIR registered against a Muslim man under Section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.
High Court ruled that the Act does not extend to other forms of divorce like Talaq-e-Hasan, which allows for revocation during the iddat period.
Brief Facts
Aftab Mohammad filed an FIR stating that his daughter, Andleev Aftab Durrani, married Shehwaj Khan in December 2020. He initially agreed to her training as an Ayurvedic doctor, but later, he demanded and received a dowry. He and his father began harassing the victim for more dowry, she attempted to adjust. When she enrolled in an MD course in Navi Mumbai they threatened her with divorce. On April 25, 2022, Shehwaj Khan issued a written divorce with false allegations violating section 3 of the Act.
The police registered the FIR and recorded the victim’s statement, revealing that Shehwaj Khan had divorced her via Tripal Talaq on January 13, 2022. Shehwaj Khan, challenging the FIR, claimed the victim left her home on January 14, 2022 and did not respond to his attempts to contact her. He sent the first Talaq notice as per Talaq-e-Hasan which he argued was revocable. The second notice was issued on May 25, 2022, and the third included a Rs. 15,000 cheque for the iddat period. Shehwaj Khan argued that the FIR was wrongly registered and the continuation of the proceedings is an abuse of the process of the law and it requested that the petition be allowed and the FIR be quashed.
Contentions of Petitioner
The counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the FIR, the petitioner had sent a notice to his wife which is valid under the Act. He further added that the act only applies to Triple Talaq, which is called Talaq-e-Biddat, and not to other forms of divorce. The petitioner had divorced his wife in an approved form of divorce called as Talaq-e-Hasan, which is recognized under the Mohamedan Law and has not been made illegal by the Act.
Contentions of Respondent
The counsel for the respondents submits that the victim had made a statement that the petitioner had divorced her by pronouncing Triple Talaq on 13.01.2022. The same falls within the prohibition of section 4 of the Act and the challan was rightly filed against the petitioner. This court is not to see the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition or the reply and this matter should be left to be learned trial court for adjudication. It is further submitted that a notice was sent by the petitioner to cover up the pronouncement of triple talaq on 13.01.2022. Whether such a talaq was pronounced or not is to be seen by the competent court and not during these proceedings.
Observation of Court
High Court observed that the petition has to be considered as per the parameters laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in A.M.Mohan v. State [2024 Latest Caselaw 183 SC] and in Maneesha Yadav v. State of U.P. [SCC OnLine SC 643]. The court also noted that the FIR mentions that on 25.04.2022 written talaq was sent by the petitioner by levelling false and baseless allegations against the victim and a copy of Talaqnama was enclosed in the application which is a violation of Section 3 of the Act. It was also mentioned by the court that “section 2(c) of the Act defines the ‘Talaq’ means Talaq-e-Biddat or any other similar form of Talaq having the effect of instantaneous and irrevocable divorce pronounced by a Muslim husband”.
It is also observed that “The legislature has only prohibited Talaq-e-Biddat or any other similar form of Talaq having the effect of instantaneous and irrevocable divorce”.
The court further noted that the petitioner followed the Talaq-e-Hasan procedure, which involves multiple pronouncements over time rather than a single instant divorce. Therefore, the form of divorce used by the petitioner does not fall within the scope of the Act’s prohibition. The court cited the Kerala High Court’s decision in Saheer v. State of Kerala, reiterating that only instantaneous and irrevocable divorces like Talaq-e-Biddat are penalised under the Act. It was stated by the Kerala High Court “The pronouncement of Talaq-e-Sunnat either by Hasan or Ahsan form has not been made illegal”.
Decision of Court
The court declined to quash the FIR and stated that the matter should proceed through the trial process. It emphasised the importance of following judicial procedures and refrained from making any conclusive remarks on the merits of the case.
Title: Shehwaz Khan v. State of H.P and Anr.
Coram: Justice Rakesh Kainthala
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Hem Kanta Kaushal, Azmat Hayat Khan, M.A. Khan (Sr. Adv.)
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Ayushi Negi, Imran Khan, Ketan Singh
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
