Telangana HC states Muslim man has no right to refuse wife’s demand for khula

Telangana High Court declared on Tuesday that a Muslim man has no right to oppose his wife's desire for khula (wife-initiated divorce) and that the court's only duty is to recognise the termination of marriage, which is obligatory on both parties.

Khula is accepted in Islamic law as a contractual dissolution of marriage started by the wife, usually requiring compensation to the husband, commonly by returning the dower (mehr), and settling the matter privately by consulting a mufti.

A bench of Justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and B R Madhusudhan Rao rendered the decision on a man's appeal challenging a family court order that dismissed his motion for declaring the khula nama (divorce certificate) granted to him null and void.

The case involves a khula nama issued in October 2020 by a group that included a mufti, a professor of Islamic studies, a professor of Arabic, and a mosque imam. The couple in question had been married since 2012, but the wife sought a khula—a form of divorce initiated by a Muslim woman—in 2017 after allegedly being assaulted by her husband and requiring hospitalization.

The husband refused to participate in reconciliation efforts, and later, in 2020, challenged the legitimacy of the khula by filing a case in family court, questioning the authority of the mufti to issue such a declaration. This petition was ultimately dismissed by the court in February 2024.

The judgment, drawing from Quranic verses, Hadith, and prior case law, clarified the legal and religious basis for khula. According to the division bench, khula is considered a no-fault divorce that can be initiated by a Muslim wife.

It emphasized that a husband cannot outright deny a wife’s request for khula. His only role is to negotiate the return of the Mehr (dower), either in full or in part. However, even if the wife refuses to return the dower, the husband still does not have the authority to reject the divorce.

“Khula is, therefore, a non-confrontational form of divorce and one which is privately settled after the parties have made an attempt to preserve the marriage,” the order further said.

“Approaching a Mufti for a Khulanama is not compulsory and does not reinforce the Khula as the Fatwa/advisory decision given by a Mufti is not legally enforceable in a Court of law. The aggrieved party/husband may approach a Court/Qazi for adjudication on the status of the marriage consequent upon the wife seeking the Khula. The Court/Qazi is required to pronounce its view, which becomes a binding judgment on the status of the marriage. The judgment/qaza pronounced by the Court is binding on the parties,” the order added, Indian Express reported.

Advocate Mubasher Hussain Ansari, who appeared on behalf of the wife, highlighted that the most significant aspect of the ruling is its clear stance that a husband's consent is not necessary for a khula divorce. Because of this, he explained, family courts are not required to conduct lengthy trials in such cases.

Ansari pointed out that once a woman requests a khula, the court’s role is limited to formally granting it—there is no obligation for the woman to justify or explain her reasons for seeking the divorce.

He noted that previously, khula cases could take six to eight years to reach a verdict, and there are currently thousands of such pending cases in Telangana. The judgment, he suggested, could help significantly reduce delays in similar matters.