Among almost all the nations of antiquity, divorce was regarded as a
natural corollary or marital rights. Romans, Hebrews, Israelis etc. all
had divorce in one or the other form. Even though the provision of divorce
was recognized in all religions Islam perhaps the first religion in the
world which has expressly recognised the termination of marriage by way of
divorce. In England divorce was introduced only 100 years back. In India
among Hindus, it was allowed only by Hindu marriage act, 1955. Before the
passing of the act divorce was not recognized by Hindu Law.
Divorce among the ancient Arabs was easy and of frequent occurrence. In
fact, this tendency has even persisted to some extent, in Islamic law. It
was regarded by prophet to be the most hateful before the Almighty God of
all permitted things; for it prevented conjugal happiness and interfered
with the proper bringing up of children.
Islamic reforms – According to Ameer Ali, the reforms of Prophet Mohammad
marked a new departure in the history of eastern legislations. The prophet
of islam is reported to have said “with Allah, the most detestable of all
things permitted is divorce”, and towards the end of his life he
practically forbade its exercise by men without intervention of an arbiter
or a judge. The Quran Ordains,”…if ye fear a breach between them twain(the
husband and the wife), appoints an arbiter from his folk and an arbiter
from her folks. If they desire amendment, Allah will make them of one
mind”. The Quran permits divorce partly because of some countenance to the
customs and partly to enable men get rid of an odious union.
Prophet Mohammad restrained the power of divorce and gave to the women the
right of obtaining the separation on reasonable grounds. The Prophet is
reported to have said,” if a women be prejudiced by a marriage, let it be
People are governed simultaneously by many different laws: laws recognized
by the state i.e. codified and uncodified laws and informal laws such as
customary practices which vary according to the cultural, social and
political context. A half-hearted attempt was made in 1937 when the
Shariat Application Act was passed with the intention to apply the Shariat,
and not the customary laws, on the Muslim population. The Act said that in
all personal matters, Shariat laws and not the customary laws would govern
the Muslims, though it did specify the specific details of what would
comprise this Shariat law. In reality, each sect in the Muslim community
continued to follow its own traditions and customs. Moreover, there was
opposition to a codified law for all Muslims from certain quarters who
were benefiting from the customary practices. Thus, the first attempts at
enacting a uniform Muslim Personal Law was rendered unsuccessful. The only
advantage of this Act lay in its attempt to bring the Muslim community
under one law despite its heterogeneity. It also brings home the fact that
Muslims in India, post-Independence, have not made any serious attempt to
codify diverse practices of its different schools of thought and
Another attempt was made in 1939 with the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage
Act. It laid down nine grounds on which a Muslim woman could seek divorce
in the court. Islamic law then allowed a man to divorce his wife at will
but a wife did not have the right either to give divorce or seek one. The
only way out for them was to convert to another religion to annul her
marriage. Alarmed at this trend, the Ulemas coaxed the British government
to pass this Act. Although the Act allowed a woman approach the court for
divorce, it did not curb the man’s right to divorce his wife orally and
unilaterally. The next step was the Muslim Women (Protection on Divorce)
Act, which was enacted only in 1986 after the Shah Bano controversy. This
law prescribed the right to maintenance for a Muslim woman after her
divorce. Different courts interpreted the law differently and some women
even continued to take resort to the Cr. P.C 125 [Criminal Procedure Code
sec. 125] to demand maintenance.
The laws, passed in 1939 and 1986, were not the result of a concerted
effort towards reforms. They were more a result of reactions by the
conservatives who saw reforms in personal law as an infringement on their
right to religion and a threat to their male identity.
DISSOLUTION OF MUSLIM MARRIAGE ACT, 1939 :
Marriages, as they define, are made in heaven and solemnized on earth. It
is a sacrament for Hindus, a sanctified contract for Muslims and a sacred
knot for Christians. Husbands and wives vow for each other, yet there have
been innumerable cases of betrayals by the spouses.
The complexity of modern society and its possible consequences such as
fast changing socio economic conditions, the disintegration of the joint
family structure, the rapid development of industrialization and
urbanization, education and employment and laws giving equal status and
rights to women, led a tremendous impact on the institution of marriage.
Few decades ago divorce was considered as an evil, the grounds of divorce
were very limited and it was sought only under compelling circumstances.
Positions have however, changed now. Marriage is no longer treated as an
indissoluble union. In fact, there has been a considerable legislative and
judicial interference in the sphere of matrimonial laws during the past
few decades all over the world. In view of the changing times, divorce
laws are being substantially modified and liberalized.
Like Hindu law, followers of Islam have their own personal law, which
states that Nikaah or marriage is a contract and may be permanent or
temporary and permits a man four wives if he treats all of them equally.
There should be a proposal or `offer,` made by or on behalf of one of the
The Muslim marriage law also states that to have a valid marriage under
the Muslim law, if a person is of sound mind, normal and has attained
puberty at the age of 15 his or her marriage cannot be performed without
his or her consent. There are certain prohibited relationships, whose
marriage is considered void. Like mother and son, grandmother and
grandson, uncle and niece, brother and sister and nephew and aunt.
i. An `acceptance` of such proposal or `offer` by or on behalf of the
ii. The `offer` and `acceptance,` both, must be expressed in the same
meeting. There is no prescribed form for proposal and acceptance. However,
a proposal, made at one meeting and an acceptance, made at another
meeting, will not constitute a valid marriage;
iii. The offer and acceptance must be made in the presence of two male
witnesses, or one male and two female witnesses, who must be adult
Mohammedans of sound mind; iv. A marriage, contracted without witnesses,
is not void but is considered irregular. Such irregularity can be cured by
consummation. However, according to Shia law, the presence of witnesses is
not necessary in any matter.
Dissolution of marriage can be by following ways:
A Husband may divorce in the following manner-
a. Talaq: which is release from the marriage tie immediately or
b. Ila: where a husband of sound mind takes a vow that he will abstain
from all relationship from his wife.
c. Zihar: where husband sane and adult compares his wife to his mother or
any other female within the prohibited degrees.
A wife may divorce in the following manner-
a. Talaqetafwiz: talaq by the wife under the husbands delegated power.
By Judicial Decree:
Following are the grounds on which a marriage maybe dissolved under the
a. Lian: Where the wife is charged with adultery and the charge is
false.She can file a regular suit for dissolution of marriage as a mere
application to the court is not the proper procedure.
b. Fask: The cancellation, abolition, revocation, annulment. Before the
passing of the dissolution of Marriage Act, Muslim women could only apply
for the dissolution of their marriage under the doctrine of Fask.
the Muslim Law a marriage is dissolved either by the death of the husband
or wife, or by divorce. After the death of a wife, the husband may remarry
immediately. But the widow cannot remarry before a certain specified
period called Iddat expires.
Muslim Marriage Act also has a provision for separation under the name of
dissolution of Marriage act, 1939. Both the parties to the marriage
contract have an opinion for divorce, but the husband`s right in this
respect is much greater than that of the wife. In case of divorce a
husband can leave his wife without any reasons merely by pronouncing the
word "Talak" thrice. Like in Hindu marriage act, divorce can also take
place due to mutual agreement between the husband and the wife which is
known as Mubarat. The husband can dissolve the marriage tie at his will. A
divorce can also take place by mutual agreement. But the wife cannot
divorce herself from her husband without his consent. She can of course
purchase her divorce from her husband and can have the marriage dissolved
by Tafweez (delegation).
Khula is another way of ending a Muslim marriage which is a form of
divorce with the consent and at the initiative of the wife. The wife gives
or agrees to give a consideration to the husband for her release from the
marriage tie. In this form relieving the husband from payment of mahr to
the wife may be a consideration.
A woman married under Muslim law shall be entitled to obtain a decree for
the dissolution of her marriage on any one or more of the following
(i) that the whereabouts of the husband have not been known for a period
of four years;
(ii) that the husband has neglected or has filed to provide for her
maintenance for a period of two years;
(ii-A) that the husband has taken an additional wife in contravention of
the provisions of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961;
(iii) that the husband has been sentenced to imprisonment for a period of
seven years or upwards;
(iv) that the husband has failed to perform, without reasonable cause, his
marital obligations for a period of three years;
(v) that the husband was impotent at the time of the marriage and
continues to be so;
(vi) that the husband has been insane for a period of two years or is
suffering from leprosy or a virulent venereal disease;
(vii) that she, having been given in marriage by her father or other
guardian before she attained the age of sixteen years, repudiated the
marriage before attaining the age of eighteen years:
Provided that the marriage has not been consummated;
(viii) that the husband treats her with cruelty, that is to say,
(a) habitually assaults her or makes her life miserable by cruelty of
conduct even if such conduct does not amount to physical ill-treatment, or
(b) associates with women of evil repute of leads an infamous life, or
(c) attempts to force her to lead an immoral life, or
(d) disposes of her property or prevents her exercising her legal rights
over it, or
(e) obstructs her in the observance of her religious profession or
(f) if he has more wives than one, does not treat her equitably in
accordance with the injunctions of the Quran,
(ix) on any other ground which is recognized as valid for the dissolution
of marriages under Muslim Law,
(a) no decree passed on ground (i) shall take effect for a period of six
months from the date of such decree, and if the husband appears either in
person or through an authorised agent within that period and satisfies the
Court he is prepared to perform his conjugal duties the Court shall set
aside the said decree; and
(b) before passing a decree on ground (v) the Court shall, on application
by the husband, make an order requiring the husband to satisfy the Court
within a period of one year from the date of such order that he has ceased
to be impotent, and if the husband so satisfied the Court within such
period, no decree shall be passed on the said ground.
A husbands failure to provide for the maintenance of the wife for a period
of 2 years mentioned in Cl.(ii) of Section 2 entitles the wife to a decree
for dissolution of marriage whether or not the husband has reasonable
cause for withholding such maintenance.
Cl.(ii) of section 2 should be read in contradistinction with Cl.(iv) as
per which the wife is entitled to to decree for dissolution of her
marriage on the ground that the husband has failed to perform without
reasonable cause his marital obligations for a period of 3 years. The
words “without reasonable cause” are significantly absent in Cl.(ii). The
duty to provide wife with maintenance is self imposed to keep the
relationship intact and it is ot a duty corresponding to the right of the
wife to claim maintenance against the husband. As against the arbitrary
power of the husband yo liquidate the marriage the wife gets a right to
dissolution of maariage on the husband’s neglect or failure to provide for
maintenance for a period of 2 years. This construction of Cl.(ii) of Sec.2
is in consonance with the Islamic law on the subject. There is therefore
no jurisdiction in introducing the words “without reasonable cause” into
Cl.(ii). The legislature in its wisdom, by providing those words in Cl(iv)
has not thought it necessary to provide this restriction in Cl.(ii).
In a suit brought by wife for dissolution of marriage on the ground that
her husband was impotent at the time of marriage and continued to be so
that facts were as follows. Marriage was celebrated on June 12, 1960 and
the suit was brought on Oct 3, 1960. the husband asked for and was granted
one year to prove that he has ceased to be impotent. On the expiry of the
period the court granted a decree on the application of the wife.
The requirements of Sec.2(v) that the husband is not only impotent at the
time of the marriage but that he continues to be impotent when the suit is
filed. The evidence in the case was held to establish impotency at both
the point of time. On the question raised that during the period of grace,
the husband was denied the company of his wife in his own house, the court
held that after the act the rule of Mohammedan Law about the duty of the
wife did not apply. The act requires an opportunity to satisfy the court
about the cessation of the condition and that the opportunity is available
only on application to the court. The provision of the act abrogated the
Mohamrdan Law. It is not the rule that the acquisition of virility can be
proved only by sexual act with the wife. Such a procedure is likely to
subject the wife to some peril.
In case of Abdul Azeem v. Fahimunnisa Begum the facts were: In
this case the wife sued the husband for dissolution of her marriage for
failure to maintain her for 2 years. She was married in 1952. in 1955 she
went away to her parents. The husband then performed the second marriage.
The suit failed. It was held that under Mahomaden Law polygamy was allowed
and could not be a ground for living apart and claiming for the
maintenance in the absence of other grounds which would justify the wife
to follow other course.
In Munnawarbai v. Sabir Mohammad case the wife left the marital
house and stayed away without any justifiable cause and then asked for
dissolution of marriage on the ground that husband was not maintaining
her, it was held that the wife is not entitled to relief under section 2
(ii) of Dissolution of Marriage Act, 1939.
Other than these situations Cl. (ix) of Section 2 states that “on any other
ground which is recognised as valid for dissolution of marriage under
Muslim Law”. This clause covers the divorces by ila, zihar, khula, mubarat
and tafweez. Imputation of unchastity or false charge of adultery against
the wife (Lian) makes a good ground for dissolution of her marriage. This
ground falls under clause(ix) of section 2 of the act.
In Noor Jahan Bibi v. Kazim Ali, one Noor Jahan filed a suit
against her husband Kazim ali who charged her that she was of bad
character and she was enamoured of one Asghar Ali and committed adultery
with him. It was held by the court that the doctrine of Lian has not been
absolute under the Muslim Law and therefore a muslim wife can bring a suit
for divorse against her husband on the ground that her husband has charged
her with adultery falsely under section 2(ix) of the act.
In M.B. Rahim v. Shamsoonnissa Begum, the privy council observed
that wherin the husband disposed of the property of her wife and confined
her to a room as if she was in a jai. He also misbehaved with his wife. In
appeal Husband raised contention that as far as Muslim Law is concerned a
wife has no right to live seperatly even though the conduct of the husband
is not good. It was held by privy council that if under the muslim law no
wife can separate herself from her husband then such law is clearly
contrary to the principle of natural justice. This case was decided in
favour of wife by the privy council.
CRUELTY: The general notion of cruelty is very subjective- depending on
time, place, persons and other factors also. The legal concept of cruelty,
which is not defined by statute, is generally described as act or conduct
of such a nature as to have caused to life, limb or health- physical or
mental or as to make a reasonable apprehension of such danger.
Cruelty, no doubt, constitutes a pompous ground for dissolution of
marriage, as the term cruelty and love and affection are repugnant to each
other. There is no strait jacket formula to define cruelty. Even a
gesture, an angry look, a sugar coated joke, an ironic look may be more
cruel than beating. Every act or conduct of one spouse which makes the
other spouse unhappy or miserable can not amount to cruelty. The mere fact
is that the erring spouse is moody, whimsical, mean, stingy, selfish,
boorish, irritable, inconsiderable, irascible etc. will not be sufficient
to amount to cruelty.
Cruelty in marital relationship, is a course of conduct of one spouse
which adversely affecting the other. Cruelty may be mental or physical,
intentional or unintentional. If it is physical, it is an issue of fact
and degree. If it is mental, the enquiry must begin as to the nature of
the cruel treatment and then as to the treatment of the mind of the
spouse. Whether it caused reasonable apprehension that it would be harmful
or injurious to live with the other, is ultimately a matter of inference
to be drawn by taking into account the nature of the conduct and its
effect on the complaining spouse. Cruelty is a ground for matrimonial
In Islamic law, the concept of cruelty (zirar) is not limited. The cruelty
provision is to be interpreted in the light of the Prophet’s exhortations
that women are as tender as glasses (qawarir) and he is the best man who
is kind to his wife. It is worth mentioned here that under Muslim law
cruel nature is a disqualification for eligibility to marry.
Section 2(viii)(a) of the concerned Act uses the words by cruel conduct
even if such conduct does not amount to physical ill treatment. This
language is wide enough to include all cases of cruelty, not merely this,
it would cover all types of misconduct or misbehaviour, serious and not
very serious on the part of the husband calculated to break spirit of the
wife by physical or moral force which was systemically exerted on her to
such a degree and to such a length of time resulting in undermining her
health, it will amount to cruelty.
Regarding cruelty of conduct the general test should apply, since the
conduct that is cruel for one woman can not be civilized enough for
another just because of the religion of the parties. The point lies in the
statutory words ‘makes her life miserable’ and the social status and
standard of self-respect of the wife should be decisive to ascertain if
the man’s conduct amounts to cruelty. A simple allegation of the wife,
unsupported by independent testimony, is not sufficient in law to
establish any charges mentioned in the law.
In case of inequitable treatment between the co-wives which amounts to
cruelty, the courts earlier providing maintenance to one wife only and
ill-treatment forcing co-wife to leave the husband as instances of unequal
treatment. In Umat-Ul-Hafiz v. Talib Hussain, husband went
abroad leaving behind his two wives in India. He provided maintenance to
one wife and neglected the other. The court granted divorce to the
The Allahabad High Court in Itawari v. Smt. Asghari observed
that a Muslim has the legal right to take a second wife even during the
subsistence of the first marriage, but if he does so, and then seeks the
assistance of the Civil court to compel the wife live with him against her
wishes on pain of severe penalties including attachment of properties, she
is entitled to ask whether the court, as a court of equity, ought to
compel her to submit to co-habitation with such a husband. In that case
the circumstances in which his second marriage took place are relevant and
material in deciding whether his conduct in taking a second wife was in
itself an act of cruelty to the first.
The onus in these days would be on the husband who takes a second wife to
explain his action and prove that his taking a second wife involved no
insult or cruelty to the first. For example, he may refute the presumption
of cruelty by proving that his second marriage solemnized at the
suggestion of the first wife or in order to gain some financial benefit(
may be through contract) the first wife may indulge or insist her husband
or reveal some other relevant circumstances will prove cruelty. But in the
absence of a strong and proper explanation the court will presume, under
modern prevailing systems, that the action of the husband in taking a
second wife involved cruelty to the first and that it would be inequitable
for the court to compel her against her wishes to live with such a
It will amount to cruelty if the husband disposes of his wife’s property
or prevents her from exercising her legal rights over it. In case
Zubaidaa v. Sardar Shah, the view expressed by Abdul Rahman J.,
that, ‘it is not always easy to determine for what purpose, husband sells
or assigns his wife’s property of any value’. Property may be used for the
treatment of wife, for the benefit of the family members, for the
education of children, for the maintenance of any other liabilities. If
the property disposed of not for the selfish ends of the husband, not with
the object of meeting a pressing needs but more in the sense of waste and
this done to deprive the wife of her property and without the consent of
wife then it shall constitute the offence of cruelty.
In Shamsunnissa Begum’s case, II. M.I. 551 the test of cruelty is based on
universal and humanitarian standards by the husband which would cause such
bodily or mental pain as to endanger the wife’s safety of health.
In another case the Bombay High Court in Shakla Bano v. Ghulam Mustafa,
has observed that an unwilling wife cannot be compelled to live along with
her husband. Cruelty can be of various shapes. It depends on various
factors like health, environment, education, economic and social
backgroung. It is settled position that persistent charges of adultery and
immorality may amount to cruelty.
It is clear that to constitute cruelty it is not necessary that there
should be actual violence or a reasonable apprehension of it. Likelihood
of violence is a good ground for the grant of relief. Presently
physical violence is not the only essential ingredient of cruelty. Mental
agony also amounts to cruelty.
It is to be noted that the term cruelty includes habitual assaults,
concubinage, associated with the women of ill repute or leads an infamous
life, attempts to force her to live her an immoral life, dispose of her
property, or prevent her to exercise her legal rights, obstructs her in
the observance of her religious profession or practice and if Muslim
husband has more than one wives, he doesn’t treat her equitably.
Today, there is a large volume of case laws on cruelty in India and
abroad. Since human nature and conduct are infinitely diverse. No hard and
fast rules can be laid down as to what acts or conducts will amount to
cruelty in any given case. However, there is a sea change in the attitudes
of the courts. There is no difficulty in holding when physical violence
amounts to cruelty. However deciding some clear cases, questions do arise
in the sphere of mental cruelty or not. The reason is that mental cruelty
may be of any kind or of infinite variety, new concept of mental cruelty
may reveal. It may be subtle or brutal. It may be by words, gestures or
even by mere silence.
Section 3: Notice to be served on heirs of the husband when the husband’s
whereabouts are not known.
In a suit to which clause (i) of section 2 applies:
(a) the names and addresses of the persons who would have been heirs of
the husband under Muslim Law if he had died on the date of the filing of
the plaint shall be stated in the plaint.
(b) notice of the suit shall be served on such persons, and
(c) such persons shall have the right to be heard in the suit:
Provided that paternal-uncle and brother of the husband, if any, shall be
cited as party even if he or they are not heirs.
Section 4: Effect of conversion to another faith.
The renunciation of Islam by a married Muslim woman or her conversion to a
faith other than Islam shall not by itself operate to dissolve her
Provided that after such renunciation, or conversion, the woman shall be
entitled to obtain a decree for the dissolution of her marriage on any of
the grounds mentioned in section 2;
Provided further that the provisions of this section shall not apply to a
woman converted to Islam from some other faith who re-embraces her former
Section 5: Right to dower not be affected.
Nothing contained in this Act shall affect any right which a married woman
may have under Muslim law to her dower or any part thereof on the
dissolution of her marriage
Section 6: (Repeal of section 5 of Act, XXVI of 1937)
Rep. by the Repealing and Amending Act, 1942 (XXV of 1942), section 2 and
After the dissolution of marriage by any means discussed above the man and
the woman can remarry immediately. In fact, unlike in a Hindu marriage,
Muslim widow is encouraged to be remarried and that`s a responsibility of
the Muslim community.
Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act 1939, has enabled women to seek divorce
on the grounds of cruelty without having a free of loosing a substantial
part of her property. Earlier, before the enactment of this act Muslim
women did not have this advantage to file an application for divorce on
the grounds of cruelty but now she can do so. This act has proved to be a
boom for all Muslim women. Women’s struggle are interconnected and
complementary and therefore has a commitment to international solidarity.
DRAWBACKS: These laws were piecemeal, targeting only certain aspect of the
personal law. For instance, the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act only
laid down grounds on which women could seek divorce. It never curbed men’s
right to unilateral oral divorce nor did it lay down any procedure for the
recovery of mehr, post-divorce maintenance or about the custody of
children.All three instances of codification of certain aspects of Muslim
personal law show that religious men from the community used their
influence on the entire process to protect the Shariat from any pro-women
reform. Accordingly all attempts at bringing about pro-women reforms and
some uniformity in the Muslim law failed.Even statutory legislations are
not without flaws. Some aspects of the law like the right of Muslim women
to seek divorce and the post-divorce maintenance have been codified. But
other aspects like inheritance, custody of children etc. have not been
codified. On top of all these is the prevalence of customary laws, which
the community has been following as a matter of tradition.In the last 20
years except for some pro-women judgments, there has been no forward
movement in the effort to reform the Muslim law by codifying it and making
it uniformly applicable to the entire Muslim population across the
SUGGESTIONS: The Muslim women, meanwhile, continued to suffer because of
polygamy, oral unilateral divorce, low mehr amounts, lack of maintenance
and other ills which plague Muslim law. In the last two decades except for
some pro-women judgments, there has been no forward movement in the effort
to reform the Muslim law by codifying it and making it uniformly
applicable to the entire Muslim population across the country. Therefore a
reform should be brought in the Muslim law to uplift the position of the
women. More of women organizations should be encouraged because of the fact
that the women’s organizations have played a remarkable role in
highlighting the plight of the Muslim women. They have continued to play a
catalyst in organizing the Muslim women around the issues like demand for
the abolition of oral unilateral divorce. This movement got a fillip
recently with the fatwa against Imrana. Imrana, a mother of five children,
from Muzaffar Nagar, was raped by her own father-in-law. The shariah
jamaat passed a fatwa, which nullified Imrana’s marriage with her husband.
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board, later put its stamp of approval
on the fatwa issued by the Darul Uloom Deoband’s above ruling. It also
pinned down the State in taking more responsibility in protecting the
rights of the Muslim women who are equal citizens and are entitled to all
such benefits, which the women of other faiths inherit by right. The
progressive elements within the Muslim community must make themselves
known to the self-styled regressive leaders and to the State and demand a
gender-just codified Muslim law.
 AIR 1978 Andh. Pra. 417 and AIR 1971 Cal. 218
 (‘69)A. Mys. 226.
 1970 M.P.L.J. Notes 23.
 AIR 1977 Cal.90.
 (1967) 11 M.I. A.551.
 AIR1945 Lah.56
 AIR1960 All.684
 AIR1943Lah. 310
 AIR 1971 Bom. 167.
 Iqbal Kaur v. Pritam Singh, AIR 1963 Punj 242( A Hindu case)
 Hamid Husaain v. K. Begum,(1918) ILR 40 All. 332
The author can be
reached at: email@example.com
Guardianship Under Muslim Law:
The source of law of guardianship and custody are certain verses in the
Koran and a few ahadis. The Koran, the alladis and other authorities on
Muslim law emphatically speak of the guardianship of the property of the
minor, the guardianship of the person is a mere inference.
Custody Under Muslim Law:
The first and foremost right to have the custody of children belongs to
the mother and she cannot be deprived of her right so long as she is not
found guilty of misconduct. Mother has the right of custody so long as she
is not disqualified.
Under Muslim Laws:
Under the "Women (Protection Of- Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986" spells out
objective of the Act as "the protection of the rights of Muslim women who
have been divorced by, or have obtained divorce from, their husbands."
Concept of Marriage in Muslim Law:
Islam, unlike other religions is a strong advocate of marriage. There is
no place of celibacy in Islam like the Roman Catholic priests & nuns. The
Prophet has said “There is no Celibacy in Islam”.
as a Matrimonial offence under Muslim Law:
Cruelty, in marital relationship, is a course of conduct of one spouse
which adversely affecting the other. Cruelty may be mental or physical,
intentional or unintentional. If it is physical, it is an issue of fact
Divorce under Muslim Law
A husband may divorce his wife by repudiating the marriage without giving
any reason. Pronouncement of such words which signify his intention to
disown the wife is sufficient.
Sources of Islamic Law:
Various sources of Islamic law are used by Islamic jurisprudence to
elucidate the Sharia, the body of Islamic law. The primary sources,
accepted universally by all Muslims, are the Qur'an and Sunnah.
Nikah in pre Islamic Arabia, meant different forms of sex relationship
between a man and a woman established on certain terms, in pre Islamic
days,women were treated as chattels, and were not given any right of
inheritance and were absolutely dependent.