Aurangabad Bench held that Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 does not criminalise traditional modes of divorce under Islamic personal law.
In a recent ruling delivered on April 23, 2025, the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court held that the pronouncement of Talaq-e-Ahsan, a traditional form of divorce recognised in Muslim personal law, is not punishable under Section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019. The Court accordingly quashed the FIR registered against a Muslim man and his parents, terming the criminal proceedings an "abuse of process of law."
The Division Bench comprising Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Sanjay A. Deshmukh was hearing Tanveer Ahmed and Ors v. State of Maharashtra, a criminal application seeking quashment of FIR No. 124/2024 registered at Bhusawal Bazar Peth Police Station, Jalgaon, as well as subsequent proceedings in Regular Criminal Case No. 1156/2024.
The applicants, husband, father-in-law, and mother-in-law of the complainant, were accused under Section 4 of the 2019 Act and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The central allegation was that the husband had pronounced an irrevocable talaq, which the complainant contended fell within the scope of the 2019 Act that penalises instantaneous and irrevocable divorce.
The Bench drew attention to Section 2(c) of the 2019 Act, which defines ‘talaq’ as "talaq-e-biddat or any other similar form of talaq having the effect of instantaneous and irrevocable divorce." Referring to the statutory scheme, the Court observed:
“What has been described in the definition of Talaq is instantaneous and irrevocable. Here, in the FIR itself, respondent No.2 has stated that the notice which applicant No.1 had given on 28.12.2023, had stated that what was given to her was Talaq-e-Ahsan i.e. one pronouncement of Talaq.”
The Court further noted that the mode of divorce employed by the link slot dana applicant involved a single pronouncement followed by a 90-day iddat period, during which no cohabitation occurred, fulfilling the essential criteria for Talaq-e-Ahsan under Islamic law.
The applicants relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Mst. Zohara Khatoon v. Mohd. Ibrahim (1981), which recognised multiple forms of dissolution of Muslim marriage, including unilateral pronouncement by the husband. The Court also referred to it’s Division Bench ruling in Shaikh Taslim Shaikh Hakim v. State of Maharashtra (2022), and the Kerala High Court’s view in Jahfer Sadiq E.A. v. Marwa (2022), both of which clarified that Talaq-e-Ahsan and Talaq-e-Hasan remain valid and permissible forms of divorce under Muslim personal law.
Addressing the inclusion of the husband’s parents in the FIR, the Court unequivocally held that:
“There is no question of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code involved in such FIRs. There cannot be a common intention of pronouncement of Talaq. Therefore… it would be an abuse of process of law if the matter is asked to be proceeded for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the said Act against the father-in-law and mother-in-law.”
Having regard to the pleadings and evidence placed on record, the Court found no basis for proceeding against any of the applicants under the 2019 Act. It observed:
“When the facts are admitted and taking into consideration the law, what was prohibited was the Talaq-e-bidat and not Talaq-e-Ahsan… it would be an abuse of process of law, if the applicants are asked to face the trial.”
Accordingly, the Court allowed the application and quashed both the FIR and the pending criminal case against all three applicants.
Picture Source :
