1
1)A.L.M. Abdullah vs. Rokeya Khanam (1969) case:
Facts
Abdullah claimed that he and Rokeya were married based on their close relationship and the
testimony of witnesses. He sought restitution of conjugal rights and an injunction to prevent
Rokeya from marrying anyone else.
Issue
Whether there was a valid marriage between A.L.M. Abdullah and Rokeya Khanam under
Muslim law.
Reasoning
Essentials of Marriage: The court examined the essentials of a valid Muslim marriage, which
include a proposal (ijab) and acceptance (qubul) in the presence of witnesses.
Evidence: The court found that there was no clear evidence of who proposed and who accepted
the marriage. The testimonies provided were not specific or direct enough to establish a valid
marriage.
Registration: The court also noted the absence of marriage registration as required by Section 5
of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (MFLO). This lack of registration further cast doubt on the
validity of the marriage.
Judgment
The High Court ruled that there was no valid marriage between A.L.M. Abdullah and Rokeya
Khanam. The court dismissed Abdullah's suit for restitution of conjugal rights and the injunction.
2) Hefzur Rahman vs. Shamsun Nahar Begum (1998)
Facts
Shamsun Nahar Begum, after being divorced by Hefzur Rahman, sought maintenance beyond
the iddat period (the waiting period a Muslim woman must observe after the death of her
husband or after a divorce).
Issue
Whether a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to maintenance beyond the iddat period under
Muslim law.
Reasoning
Interpretation of 'Mataa': The court examined the concept of 'mataa' (a gift given to a divorced
woman) as mentioned in the Quran. The High Court had previously equated 'mataa' with
maintenance, but this interpretation was challenged.
Quranic Verses: The court referred to Ayat 241 of Surah Al-Baqarah, which mentions 'mataa' as
a gift, not as maintenance. The court emphasized that 'mataa' is a voluntary gift and not an
obligatory maintenance payment.
2
Precedents and Legal Texts: The court reviewed various precedents and legal texts, including
interpretations by Islamic scholars, to determine the correct application of 'mataa'.
Judgement
The Supreme Court of Bangladesh ruled that 'mataa' is not equivalent to maintenance and that
a divorced Muslim woman is not entitled to maintenance beyond the iddat period. The court held
that 'mataa' is a voluntary gift and not an obligatory payment.
3) Abdul Qadir vs. Salima (1886)
Facts
Abdul Qadir and Salima were married for three months. Salima went to visit her parents, but her
father refused to let her return to her marital home. Abdul Qadir filed a suit for the restitution of
conjugal rights against Salima and her father.
Issue
Whether a petition for restitution of conjugal rights could be filed before the payment of dower
(mahr) in a Muslim marriage.
Reasoning
Nature of Muslim Marriage: The court examined the nature of Muslim marriage, which is
considered a civil contract. The payment of dower is an essential part of this contract.
Payment of Dower: The court noted that the non-payment of dower does not invalidate the
marriage but affects the husband's right to enforce conjugal rights. The husband must pay the
prompt dower before seeking judicial remedy.
Legal Precedents: Justice Syed Mahmood, in his opinion, emphasized that the husband's right
to restitution of conjugal rights is conditional upon the payment of the prompt dower.
Judgment
The Allahabad High Court ruled that Abdul Qadir's petition for restitution of conjugal rights could
not be maintained without the payment of the prompt dower. The court dismissed Abdul Qadir's
appeal, affirming that the payment of dower is a prerequisite for seeking such a remedy.
This case is significant as it clarifies the legal position regarding the enforcement of conjugal
rights in Muslim marriages and underscores the importance of fulfilling contractual obligations,
such as the payment of dower.
4) Anwar Hossain vs. Momtaj Begum (2003)
Facts
Momtaj Begum filed a suit for dower and maintenance in the Family Court, claiming that she
and Anwar Hossain were married according to Muslim law, but the marriage was not registered.
She alleged that Anwar Hossain demanded dowry and eventually drove her away from his
3
house. Anwar Hossain denied the marriage, claiming that the suit was a diversion from an
incident involving her brother.
Issue
Whether there was a valid marriage between Anwar Hossain and Momtaj Begum, and if so,
whether she was entitled to dower and maintenance.
Reasoning
Marriage Validity: The Family Court evaluated the evidence, including testimonies from
independent witnesses who confirmed the marriage and cohabitation. The court inferred an
adverse presumption against Anwar Hossain due to his denial of the marriage despite evidence
to the contrary.
Legal Principles: The court considered the essentials of a valid Muslim marriage, which include
a proposal and acceptance in the presence of witnesses. The absence of a registered
kabinnama (marriage contract) was noted, but the court found sufficient evidence of a valid
marriage based on continuous cohabitation and witness testimonies.
Judgment
The Family Court decreed in favor of Momtaj Begum, affirming that there was a valid marriage
and awarding her dower and maintenance. The Court of Appeal upheld this decision. However,
the High Court Division, in its revisional jurisdiction, reversed the judgments of the lower courts
and dismissed the suit. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh later reinstated the Family Court's
decision, recognizing the marriage and granting Momtaj Begum her claims.
This case highlights the importance of witness testimonies and continuous cohabitation in
establishing the validity of a marriage under Muslim law, even in the absence of formal
registration.
5) Khurshid Bibi vs. Baboo Muhammad Amin (1967)
Facts
Khurshid Bibi sought a divorce (khula) from her husband, Baboo Muhammad Amin, on the
grounds of incompatibility and irreconcilable differences. She approached the court to dissolve
the marriage without her husband's consent.
Issue
Whether a Muslim woman has the right to obtain a divorce (khula) without the consent of her
husband under Islamic law.
Reasoning
Interpretation of Khula: The court examined the concept of khula, which allows a woman to seek
a divorce by returning her dower (mahr) or another form of compensation to her husband. The
court referred to Quranic verses and Hadiths to interpret the principles of khula.
4
Equality in Marriage: The court emphasized that Islam places both husband and wife on an
equal footing regarding their mutual rights and obligations. The court noted that the husband's
consent is not a prerequisite for khula if the wife is willing to return the dower or compensation.
Judgment
The Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled in favor of Khurshid Bibi, affirming that a Muslim woman
has the right to obtain a divorce (khula) without her husband's consent. The court held that the
wife's willingness to return the dower or compensation is sufficient for the dissolution of the
marriage.
This landmark case significantly advanced women's rights in Pakistan by recognizing their
autonomy in seeking a divorce and setting a precedent for future cases involving khula.
Taqi Tahmid
Dept. of Law
University of Barishal 1
1
Taqi Tahmid
